35 Cited authorities

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 279,848 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (2007) Cited 65,237 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A.
534 U.S. 506 (2002) Cited 17,349 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"
Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 29,208 times 144 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Raines v. Byrd
521 U.S. 811 (1997) Cited 1,859 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding specifically and only that "individual members of Congress [lack] Article III standing"
Elrod v. Burns
427 U.S. 347 (1976) Cited 4,328 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a requirement that public employees join the Democratic Party infringed their freedom of association
Johnson v. De Grandy
512 U.S. 997 (1994) Cited 1,714 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that because the United States was not a party to the state court action, Rooker - Feldman was not a bar to its federal claims
Baker v. Carr
369 U.S. 186 (1962) Cited 5,300 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge Tennessee's apportionment of state representatives when that apportionment "effect[ed] a gross disproportion of representation to voting population"
Brooks v. Ross
578 F.3d 574 (7th Cir. 2009) Cited 3,345 times
Holding that a claim is plausible if the facts alleged raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will yield evidence supporting the allegations
United States v. Hays
515 U.S. 737 (1995) Cited 989 times
Holding that while a plaintiff residing in a racially gerrymandered district had standing to challenge the redistricting, a plaintiff not residing in such a district lacked standing to challenge the redistricting
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 163,896 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Radogno et al v. IL State Board of Elections et al

35 Cited authorities

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"

Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding specifically and only that "individual members of Congress [lack] Article III standing"

Holding that a requirement that public employees join the Democratic Party infringed their freedom of association

Holding that because the United States was not a party to the state court action, Rooker - Feldman was not a bar to its federal claims

Holding that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge Tennessee's apportionment of state representatives when that apportionment "effect[ed] a gross disproportion of representation to voting population"

Holding that a claim is plausible if the facts alleged raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will yield evidence supporting the allegations

Holding that while a plaintiff residing in a racially gerrymandered district had standing to challenge the redistricting, a plaintiff not residing in such a district lacked standing to challenge the redistricting

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."