19 Cited authorities

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 266,461 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' "
Shady Grove Orthopedic v. Allstate Ins. Co.
559 U.S. 393 (2010) Cited 1,155 times 44 Legal Analyses
Holding that rules of civil procedure allowing multiple claims to be litigated together "neither change plaintiffs' separate entitlements to relief nor abridge defendants' rights; they alter only how the claims are processed"
Ruotolo v. City of N.Y
514 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 2,095 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a party seeking to amend pursuant to a Rule 59 or Rule 60 motion "must first have the judgment vacated or set aside" under those Rules
Cresswell v. Sullivan Cromwell
922 F.2d 60 (2d Cir. 1990) Cited 529 times
Holding that a United States citizen domiciled abroad cannot ever be diverse from any opposing party
Samiento v. World Yacht Inc.
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1258 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 281 times 12 Legal Analyses
Affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because such an action does not lie where the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law
Ansam Associates, Inc. v. Cola Petroleum, Ltd.
760 F.2d 442 (2d Cir. 1985) Cited 305 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that trial court did not abuse discretion in denying leave to amend where plaintiff already had amended once, discovery period had concluded and defendant had filed motion for summary judgment
Gustafson v. Bell Atlantic Corp.
171 F. Supp. 2d 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) Cited 86 times
Finding that equitable tolling did not apply where the plaintiff "knew the facts that would comprise a cause of action"
Johnson v. Methodist Medical Center of Illinois
10 F.3d 1300 (7th Cir. 1993) Cited 100 times
Upholding denial of leave to amend to add entirely new theory of case when plaintiff was presented with likelihood of a successful motion for summary judgment by defendant on prior complaint
Shady Grove Orthopedic Assocs., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co.
556 U.S. 1220 (2009) Cited 3 times
No. 08–1008. 05-04-2009 SHADY GROVE ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES, P.A., petitioner, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY. Opinion Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted.
Shady Grove Orthopedic v. Allstate Ins. Co.
549 F.3d 137 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 29 times 2 Legal Analyses
Docket No. 07-0141-cv. Argued: September 10, 2008. Decided: November 19, 2008. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Gershon, J. John S. Spadaro, John Sheehan Spadaro, LLC, Hockessin, DE, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Andrew T. Hahn, Sr., Seyfarth Shaw LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellee. Before: CABRANES, POOLER, KATZMANN, Circuit Judges. POOLER, Circuit Judge: In this appeal, we address whether Section 901(b) of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules
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 345,715 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
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 90,478 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Spicer et al v. Pier Sixty LLC et al

19 Cited authorities

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' "

Holding that rules of civil procedure allowing multiple claims to be litigated together "neither change plaintiffs' separate entitlements to relief nor abridge defendants' rights; they alter only how the claims are processed"

Holding that a party seeking to amend pursuant to a Rule 59 or Rule 60 motion "must first have the judgment vacated or set aside" under those Rules

Holding that a United States citizen domiciled abroad cannot ever be diverse from any opposing party

Affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because such an action does not lie where the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law

Holding that trial court did not abuse discretion in denying leave to amend where plaintiff already had amended once, discovery period had concluded and defendant had filed motion for summary judgment

Finding that equitable tolling did not apply where the plaintiff "knew the facts that would comprise a cause of action"

Upholding denial of leave to amend to add entirely new theory of case when plaintiff was presented with likelihood of a successful motion for summary judgment by defendant on prior complaint

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

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint