21 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 260,930 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Kentucky v. Graham
473 U.S. 159 (1985) Cited 19,710 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity," and that "a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself"
Ramming v. U.S.
281 F.3d 158 (5th Cir. 2001) Cited 3,514 times
Holding that a court ruling on a Rule 12(b) motion may evaluate “ the complaint alone, the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts evidenced in the record, or the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts plus the court's resolution of disputed facts”
Krim v. pcOrder.com, Inc.
402 F.3d 489 (5th Cir. 2005) Cited 309 times
Affirming dismissal of Section 11 claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where plaintiffs could not prove shares traceable to offering, but had submitted expert evidence showing there was a 99.85% statistical likelihood that shares were from offering
Henrickson v. Potter
327 F.3d 444 (5th Cir. 2003) Cited 85 times
Holding that the ADA does not allow plaintiffs to file suit against the Postmaster General because the statute's definition of employer expressly excludes the United States
Clark v. U.S.
326 F.3d 911 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 64 times
Affirming that the FTCA only applies to tort claims
Shell v. U.S. Dept. of Hous.
355 F. App'x 300 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 33 times
Holding that the "district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing" an injunction because the "district court referenced at least seven cases that had been filed" by plaintiff, "all of which had been dismissed, many on grounds of res judicata"
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Atkins
225 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2000) Cited 45 times
Holding that once "a properly filled out and signed designation of beneficiary form" is turned over to an employing office, the form is considered received by the office
Martin v. U.S.
Case No. 8:04-CV-178-T-27MSS, Crim. Case No. 8:00-CR-324-T-27MSS (M.D. Fla. Aug. 28, 2006) Cited 27 times
Holding that HIPAA does not provide a private cause of action in which individuals may seek relief
Godwin v. Secretary of Hous. Urban Develop
356 F.3d 310 (D.C. Cir. 2004) Cited 30 times
Holding that while the FHA authorizes judicial review when HUD charges discriminatory housing practices, it confers no right of review when HUD fails to issue a charge; hence a federal court lacks jurisdiction over an action for such review
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 160,697 times 196 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1331 - Federal question
28 U.S.C. § 1331 Cited 99,432 times 136 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."
Section 551 - Definitions
5 U.S.C. § 551 Cited 4,835 times 77 Legal Analyses
Adopting the definition set out in the APA
Section 3601 - Declaration of policy
42 U.S.C. § 3601 Cited 4,047 times 44 Legal Analyses
Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”
Section 3613 - Enforcement by private persons
42 U.S.C. § 3613 Cited 1,567 times 6 Legal Analyses
Granting right to sue in state or federal court
Section 12188 - Enforcement
42 U.S.C. § 12188 Cited 1,358 times 5 Legal Analyses
Providing that the remedies available to individuals are set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-3, which allows a private right of action only for injunctive relief for violations of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Soniat v. Department of Housing And Urban Development et al

21 Cited authorities

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

Holding that "an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity," and that "a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself"

Holding that a court ruling on a Rule 12(b) motion may evaluate “ the complaint alone, the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts evidenced in the record, or the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts plus the court's resolution of disputed facts”

Affirming dismissal of Section 11 claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where plaintiffs could not prove shares traceable to offering, but had submitted expert evidence showing there was a 99.85% statistical likelihood that shares were from offering

Holding that the ADA does not allow plaintiffs to file suit against the Postmaster General because the statute's definition of employer expressly excludes the United States

Affirming that the FTCA only applies to tort claims

Holding that the "district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing" an injunction because the "district court referenced at least seven cases that had been filed" by plaintiff, "all of which had been dismissed, many on grounds of res judicata"

Holding that once "a properly filled out and signed designation of beneficiary form" is turned over to an employing office, the form is considered received by the office

Holding that HIPAA does not provide a private cause of action in which individuals may seek relief

Holding that while the FHA authorizes judicial review when HUD charges discriminatory housing practices, it confers no right of review when HUD fails to issue a charge; hence a federal court lacks jurisdiction over an action for such review

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

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."

Adopting the definition set out in the APA

Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”

Granting right to sue in state or federal court

Providing that the remedies available to individuals are set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-3, which allows a private right of action only for injunctive relief for violations of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964