§Why CasetextPricing

Rascoe et al v. Cody et al

BRIEF IN SUPPORT re MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

100 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 253,044 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,932 times   365 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,340 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  4. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 216,408 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  5. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,970 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  6. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 113,170 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

  7. Holland v. Florida

    560 U.S. 631 (2010)   Cited 14,097 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 2254 does not preclude equitable tolling of a statute of limitations based on attorney misconduct in habeas proceedings

  8. Pace v. Diguglielmo

    544 U.S. 408 (2005)   Cited 12,833 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a five-month delay demonstrated a lack of diligence

  9. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services

    436 U.S. 658 (1978)   Cited 67,160 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "local government . . . are 'persons'" for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983

  10. Coleman v. Thompson

    501 U.S. 722 (1991)   Cited 26,271 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding in relevant part that federal habeas review of a procedurally defaulted claim is barred "unless the prisoner can demonstrate cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law"

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 487,288 times   691 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 346,241 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  13. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,909 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  14. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 156,377 times   194 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  15. Section 2253 - Appeal

    28 U.S.C. § 2253   Cited 115,002 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Conditioning the taking of an appeal on the issuance of a "certificate of appealability"

  16. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,490 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  17. Section 1291 - Final decisions of district courts

    28 U.S.C. § 1291   Cited 88,794 times   139 Legal Analyses
    Granting jurisdiction to the courts of appeals from final decisions of federal district courts "except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court"

  18. Section 2244 - Finality of determination

    28 U.S.C. § 2244   Cited 65,333 times   166 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 2255 incorporates § 2244(b) as part of the certification procedures of § 2244 and instructing that "the district court must dismiss the motion that we have allowed the applicant to file, without reaching the merits of the motion, if the court finds that the movant has not satisfied the requirements for the filing of such a motion."

  19. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 61,843 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  20. Rule 32.1 - Citing Judicial Dispositions

    Fed. R. App. P. 32.1   Cited 34,458 times   152 Legal Analyses
    Permitting court to cite to unpublished federal judicial opinions