10 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 252,626 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
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (2007) Cited 61,623 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"
Neitzke v. Williams
490 U.S. 319 (1989) Cited 55,774 times
Holding that "an in forma pauperis pro se complaint may only be dismissed as frivolous ... when the petitioner cannot make any claim with a rational or arguable basis in law or in fact"
Young v. City of St. Charles
244 F.3d 623 (8th Cir. 2001) Cited 740 times
Holding appeal to city administrator and review board per city procedures sufficient "name-clearing hearing" although plaintiff contended that the board had not considered all evidence
Coons v. Mineta
410 F.3d 1036 (8th Cir. 2005) Cited 586 times
Finding allegations alone relating to the tolling of the statute of limitations may be sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss
Cole v. Homier Distributing Co.
599 F.3d 856 (8th Cir. 2010) Cited 421 times
Finding that "lost-profit damages cannot rest upon mere speculation" and affirming an expert's exclusion where the expert's twenty-five-year damage term was speculative because the parties could terminate the contract with ninety-days' notice and there was no indication it would continue for twenty-five years
Aoki v. Benihana Inc.
839 F. Supp. 2d 759 (D. Del. 2012) Cited 31 times
Finding most important consideration for choice of law analysis in widespread internet defamation cases is residence of party allegedly defamed
State v. Nixon
234 S.W.3d 442 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 28 times
Holding that sovereign immunity "bars holding the government or its political subdivisions liable for the torts of its officers or agents unless such immunity is expressly waived"
Hankins v. City of Hazelwood
Case No. 4:13-CV-1691-SNLJ (E.D. Mo. Mar. 13, 2014) Cited 2 times
Dismissing Missouri tort claims against the defendant municipality where the "plaintiff plead[ed] no facts showing that an exception to sovereign immunity applie[d]."
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 345,805 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

White et al v. Jackson et al

10 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 a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"

Holding that "an in forma pauperis pro se complaint may only be dismissed as frivolous ... when the petitioner cannot make any claim with a rational or arguable basis in law or in fact"

Holding appeal to city administrator and review board per city procedures sufficient "name-clearing hearing" although plaintiff contended that the board had not considered all evidence

Finding allegations alone relating to the tolling of the statute of limitations may be sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss

Finding most important consideration for choice of law analysis in widespread internet defamation cases is residence of party allegedly defamed

Holding that sovereign immunity "bars holding the government or its political subdivisions liable for the torts of its officers or agents unless such immunity is expressly waived"

Dismissing Missouri tort claims against the defendant municipality where the "plaintiff plead[ed] no facts showing that an exception to sovereign immunity applie[d]."

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