9 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 251,520 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
Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.
500 U.S. 90 (1991) Cited 1,202 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that while Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 establishes procedural requirements concerning the "adequacy of the shareholder representative's pleadings," state law governs the substance of the demand requirement
Fritz v. Charter Tp. of Comstock
592 F.3d 718 (6th Cir. 2010) Cited 1,124 times
Holding that "for purposes of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, all well-pleaded material allegations of the pleadings of the opposing party must be taken as true, and the motion may be granted only if the moving party is nevertheless clearly entitled to judgment"
Mitchell v. McNeil
487 F.3d 374 (6th Cir. 2007) Cited 276 times
Holding that "[t]here is no statutory or common law right, much less a constitutional right, to an investigation."
Kramer v. Western Pacific Industries
546 A.2d 348 (Del. 1988) Cited 283 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a shareholder may bring a direct action as an individual or as part of "a class [of shareholders], for injuries done to them in their individual capacities by corporate fiduciaries"
Gavriles v. Verizon Wireless
194 F. Supp. 2d 674 (E.D. Mich. 2002) Cited 13 times
Explaining that "[d]isgorgement is an equitable remedy to force a defendant to give up the amount equal to the defendant's unjust enrichment," and "is not intended to compensate the victim of fraud"
In the Matter of Consumers Power Co. Derivative Litigation
111 F.R.D. 419 (E.D. Mich. 1986) Cited 7 times
In Matter of Consumers Power Co Derivative Litigation, 111 F.R.D. 419 (E.D. Mich. 1986), the court rejected the Hall holding.
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 344,565 times 920 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 23.1 - Derivative Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.1 Cited 1,945 times 26 Legal Analyses
Treating unincorporated associations and corporations similarly for derivative suits

Strategic Turnaround Equity Partners, L.P. (Cayman) v. Fife et al

9 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that while Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 establishes procedural requirements concerning the "adequacy of the shareholder representative's pleadings," state law governs the substance of the demand requirement

Holding that "for purposes of a motion for judgment on the pleadings, all well-pleaded material allegations of the pleadings of the opposing party must be taken as true, and the motion may be granted only if the moving party is nevertheless clearly entitled to judgment"

Holding that "[t]here is no statutory or common law right, much less a constitutional right, to an investigation."

Holding that a shareholder may bring a direct action as an individual or as part of "a class [of shareholders], for injuries done to them in their individual capacities by corporate fiduciaries"

Explaining that "[d]isgorgement is an equitable remedy to force a defendant to give up the amount equal to the defendant's unjust enrichment," and "is not intended to compensate the victim of fraud"

In Matter of Consumers Power Co Derivative Litigation, 111 F.R.D. 419 (E.D. Mich. 1986), the court rejected the Hall holding.

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

Treating unincorporated associations and corporations similarly for derivative suits