20 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 266,946 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 279,983 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
  3. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,766 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete
  4. Warth v. Seldin

    422 U.S. 490 (1975)   Cited 12,240 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
  5. Bennett v. Spear

    520 U.S. 154 (1997)   Cited 3,812 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Final Biological Opinion has "legal consequences," even though the action agency is not legally obligated to accept the opinion's recommendations or conclusions, because the opinion "alter the legal regime to which the action agency is subject"
  6. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

    435 U.S. 519 (1978)   Cited 1,780 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where rulemaking fulfills basic APA standards for notice and procedure, a court will not impose additional process
  7. Goodman v. Praxair

    494 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2007)   Cited 1,822 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court erred by dismissing the complaint under Rule 12(b) as time-barred where the complaint did not allege facts sufficiently clear to conclude that the statute of limitations had run
  8. Richmond, Fredericksburg Potomac R. v. U.S.

    945 F.2d 765 (4th Cir. 1991)   Cited 2,508 times
    Holding that the limitations period started when the plaintiff first learned of the disputed covenant, not when the government later attempted to enforce that covenant for the first time
  9. American Canoe Ass'n v. Murphy Farms, Inc.

    326 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2003)   Cited 929 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the district court abused its discretion in denying the [motion for reconsideration]"
  10. Richmond, Fredericksburg Potomac R. v. Forst

    4 F.3d 244 (4th Cir. 1993)   Cited 940 times
    Holding that because the asserted statute of limitations defense does not appear on the face of the third-party complaint, "it is inappropriate to address it in the current posture of the case[]" and noting that this defense is "more properly reserved for consideration on a motion for summary judgment."
  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 361,663 times   960 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 163,974 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  13. Section 702 - Right of review

    5 U.S.C. § 702   Cited 7,259 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Granting judicial review of "agency action"
  14. Section 303 - Policy on lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites

    49 U.S.C. § 303   Cited 675 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Listing requirements applicable to the Secretary of Transportation
  15. Section 139 - Efficient environmental reviews for project decisionmaking and One Federal Decision

    23 U.S.C. § 139   Cited 41 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Directing the Secretary of Transportation to "allow for the use of programmatic approaches to conduct environmental reviews that" generate efficiencies on multiple metrics
  16. Section 4370m-6 - Litigation, judicial review, and savings provision

    42 U.S.C. § 4370m-6   Cited 3 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) Limitations on claims (1) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a claim arising under Federal law seeking judicial review of any authorization issued by a Federal agency for a covered project shall be barred unless- (A) the claim is filed not later than 2 years after the date of publication in the Federal Register of notice of final agency action on the authorization, unless a shorter time is specified in the Federal law under which judicial review is allowed; and (B) in the

  17. Section 1502.14 - Alternatives including the proposed action

    40 C.F.R. § 1502.14   Cited 121 times
    Requiring agency to "briefly discuss the reasons" for eliminating alternatives from detailed study