§Why CasetextPricing

Talk Radio Network Enterprises, Llc et al v. Cumulus Media, Inc. et al

Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim . Oral Argument requested.

37 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 267,813 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 280,791 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. Parrino v. FHP, Inc.

    146 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 1,288 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court properly considered documents attached to a motion to dismiss that described the terms of plaintiff's group health insurance plan, where plaintiff alleged membership in the plan, his claims depended on the conditions described in the documents, and plaintiff never disputed their authenticity

  4. International Audiotext Network, Inc. v. AT&T

    62 F.3d 69 (2d Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,401 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if a complaint "relies heavily upon [a contract's] terms and effect" the contract may be considered at the 12(b) stage even if the contract is not incorporated in or attached to the complaint

  5. Murphy v. American Home Prod

    58 N.Y.2d 293 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 1,885 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the limitation period for commencing a judicial action for unlawful discrimination in employment is the three-year period of N YCiv.Prac.L. R. § 214

  6. Semegen v. Weidner

    780 F.2d 727 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 1,014 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations must be "specific enough to give defendants notice of the particular misconduct which is alleged to constitute the fraud charged so that they can defend against the charge and not just deny that they have done anything wrong"

  7. McGanty v. Staudenraus

    321 Or. 532 (Or. 1995)   Cited 503 times
    Holding that employee acting within scope of employment is not third party to contract between employer and another for purpose of tort of intentional interference with economic relations and utilizing similar "scope of employment" test

  8. Bennett v. Farmers Insurance Co. of Oregon

    332 Or. 138 (Or. 2001)   Cited 153 times
    Holding that notwithstanding plaintiff's relinquishment of financial control to the defendant, as a matter of law the facts of the parties' dealings did not give rise to a fiduciary relationship

  9. Conway v. Pacific University

    324 Or. 231 (Or. 1996)   Cited 158 times
    Holding that "the relationship between [employee] and [employer] did not rise to the level of a special relationship such that the law imposed a duty in tort" and rejecting the employee's argument that an employee handbook "created a contractual obligation on the [employer's] part to further [the employee's] interests, giving rise to a duty in tort"

  10. National Union Fire Ins Com of Pitts v. Xerox

    25 A.D.3d 309 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)   Cited 74 times

    6820. January 3, 2006. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered January 5, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from, granted in part defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff's motion to replead, unanimously affirmed, with costs. D'Amato Lynch, New York (Ronald H. Alenstein of counsel), for appellant. Cravath, Swaine Moore LLP, New York (Sandra C. Goldstein of counsel), for Xerox Corporation, respondent. Day, Berry Howard LLP, New York (Thomas

  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 362,607 times   962 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 164,455 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 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 101,144 times   141 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."

  14. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 65,142 times   81 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  15. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,207 times   337 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  16. Section 15 - Suits by persons injured

    15 U.S.C. § 15   Cited 5,765 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Granting private right of action to anyone who has been injured "by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws ..."

  17. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,480 times   31 Legal Analyses
    In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.

  18. Section 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 3,267 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Forbidding every "contract, combination . . . or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States"

  19. Section 12 - Definitions; short title

    15 U.S.C. § 12   Cited 922 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the statute only applies to an express list of federal law

  20. Section 28 - Repealed

    15 U.S.C. § 28   Cited 676 times

    15 U.S.C. § 28 Pub. L. 98-620, title IV, §402(11), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3358 Section, acts Feb. 11, 1903, ch. 544, §1, 32 Stat. 823; June 25, 1910, ch. 428, 36 Stat. 854; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167; Apr. 6, 1942, ch. 210, §1, 56 Stat. 198; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §32(a), 62 Stat. 991; May 24, 1949, ch. 139, §127, 63 Stat. 107; Dec. 21, 1974, Pub. L. 93-528, §4, 88 Stat. 1708, related to expedition of actions by the United States involving general public importance. STATUTORY NOTES