Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

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

Papasan v. Allain

Holding that Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"

Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall

Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation

Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court

Holding that, in suit by Taiwanese manufacturer for indemnification against Japanese manufacturer, the assertion by California court of personal jurisdiction over Japanese manufacturer was unreasonable

Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.

Holding that jurisdiction was proper in New Hampshire for publication-based defamation torts, even though the defendant magazine publisher sold most of its magazines elsewhere and that, as a result, "the bulk of the harm done to [the plaintiff] occurred outside New Hampshire"

Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

Holding that states may exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants with "certain minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice’ " (quoting Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940) )

Norris v. Hearst Trust

Holding plaintiffs lacked standing because they were "neither consumers nor competitors in the market attempted to be constrained"

Michiana Easy Livin' Country v. Holten

Holding that to establish specific jurisdiction, the cause of action must arise from the defendant's contacts with Texas

Williams v. WMX Technologies, Inc.

Holding Rule 9(b) requires a plaintiff plead the "who, what, when, where, and how" of the alleged fraud

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

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

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

Section 17.042 - Acts Constituting Business in This State

Authorizing jurisdiction over those "doing business" in Texas

Section 24.005 - Transfers Fraudulent As to Present and Future Creditors

Requiring a transferor to act with “actual intent to . . . defraud,” but saying nothing about the transferee's state of mind

Section 24.002 - Definitions

Defining the term "insider" to include "a person in control of the debtor"

Section 24.001 - Short Title

Noting that Chapter 24 of the Business and Commerce Code may be cited as the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act

Section 24.006 - Transfers Fraudulent As to Present Creditors

Section 24.009 - Defenses, Liability, and Protection of Transferee

Providing that creditors may recover "the value of the asset transferred," which "must be for an amount equal to the value of the asset at the time of the transfer, subject to adjustment as the equities may require"