§Why CasetextPricing

Sims v. First Horizon National Corporation et al

REPLY to Response to Motion re MOTION to Dismiss Count I, and portions of Counts III, IV, and V of the Amended Complaint

37 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,784 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 266,697 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. Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

    528 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 2,600 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on a motion to dismiss, a court “may consider the Complaint and any exhibits attached thereto, public records, items appearing in the record of the case and exhibits attached to defendant's motion to dismiss so long as they are referred to in the Complaint and are central to the claims contained therein”

  4. Pugh v. Tribune

    521 F.3d 686 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 533 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Stoneridge precluded primary liability for an insider at Tribune

  5. Bovee v. Coopers Lybrand C.P.A

    272 F.3d 356 (6th Cir. 2001)   Cited 519 times
    Holding that "a court may consider the full text of the SEC filings, prospectus, analysts' reports and statements `integral to the complaint,' even if not attached [to the complaint], without converting the motion into one for summary judgment under [Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure]."

  6. Marks v. Newcourt Credit Group, Inc.

    342 F.3d 444 (6th Cir. 2003)   Cited 395 times
    Holding that a single sentence in support of a claim in Appellant's brief could not overcome forfeiture

  7. Syncor v. Cardinal

    516 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 321 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, where parties “reached an enforceable settlement agreement subject to court approval,” defendant could not withdraw from agreement even before court approval

  8. Moench v. Robertson

    62 F.3d 553 (3d Cir. 1995)   Cited 315 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fiduciaries of Employee Stock Option Plans can be held liable under ERISA in limited circumstances

  9. In re Unisys Sav. Plan Litigation

    74 F.3d 420 (3d Cir. 1996)   Cited 238 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a fiduciary that committed a breach of duty in making an investment decision for a Plan may nevertheless take advantage of the § 1104(c) defense

  10. Kuper v. Iovenko

    66 F.3d 1447 (6th Cir. 1995)   Cited 217 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding § 1104 contains a causation requirement

  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 345,981 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1104 - Fiduciary duties

    29 U.S.C. § 1104   Cited 4,827 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Specifying duties of a "fiduciary . . . with respect to a plan"