§Why CasetextPricing

Sapere CTA Fund, LP v. Corzine et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re:

31 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 260,142 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 273,590 times   368 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

  3. United States v. Bestfoods

    524 U.S. 51 (1998)   Cited 1,433 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ownership and control is insufficient to demonstrate an alter-ego relationship

  4. Arista Records v. Doe 3

    604 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2010)   Cited 2,949 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he Twombly plausibility standard . . . does not prevent a plaintiff from pleading facts alleged upon information and belief where the facts are peculiarly within the possession and control of the defendant, or where the belief is based on factual information that makes the inference of culpability plausible"

  5. Nakahata v. N.Y.-Presbyterian Healthcare Sys., Inc.

    723 F.3d 192 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 628 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[a]llegations of fraud are subject to a heightened pleading standard"

  6. In re Sharp Intern. Corp.

    403 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 641 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff must satisfy specific pleading requirements of Rule 9(b) to state actual fraudulent transfer claim under New York law

  7. Cromer Finance Ltd. v. Berger

    137 F. Supp. 2d 452 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)   Cited 192 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that substantial assistance exists "where a defendant affirmatively assists, helps conceal, or by virtue of failing to act when required to do so enables the fraud to proceed"

  8. Lusk v. Foxmeyer Health Corp.

    129 F.3d 773 (5th Cir. 1997)   Cited 187 times
    Holding that a parent and subsidiary were not a single enterprise because the court concluded, inter alia, that the two companies did not share the same human resources department

  9. Munoz-Nagel v. Guess, Inc.

    12-CV-1312 (ER) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2013)   Cited 108 times
    Noting that while the court's individual rules require a party to obtain permission prior to filing a sur-reply, given plaintiff's pro se status, the court considered it in connection with the motion to dismiss

  10. Gracey v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (In re Amaranth Natural Gas Commodities Litig.)

    730 F.3d 170 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 103 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Setting out the standard for market manipulation under the CEA

  11. 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 354,229 times   943 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 160,289 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,551 times   328 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity