ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Florida Blogs -> South Florida Lawyers

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Florida

: South Florida Lawyers

Dwyane Wade Cites Iqbal!

ADVERTISEMENTS

Hey, two of my favorite things, together again:
First, Plaintiff again fails to plead sufficient facts to clear the pleading hurdle set forth by the Supreme Court in Ascroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). As the Court recognized in the Order, when facing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss ?a plaintiff?s obligation to provide the grounds of his entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.? Order at 4 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.)

In Twombly, the Supreme Court confirmed that in order to survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) an antitrust complaint must contain factual allegations which are ?enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true.? Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.

Citing Iqbal, this Court also reminded the parties that ?Plaintiff must plead enough facts to state a plausible basis for the claim.? Order at 4. Ultimately, the facts set forth in the complaint must be sufficient to ?nudge the[ ] claims across the line from conceivable to plausible.? Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570.

Let me offer some unsolicited advice (the best kind!) to my pal Bob Turken.

Your motion was plenty strong without a throwaway Iqbal argument (you can read the whole thing here).

Do you really think Judge Marra will blow past your smartly presented and credible "market definition" deficiency argument ("South Florida NBA sports stars who have a funnily-spelled first name" or something), conclude that indeed a proper market definition was provided but then bounce it on Iqbal plausibility grounds?

If he did, would that be what you want to be arguing about on appeal?

Reminds me of that old brief-writing maxim I tell my associates -- get rid of arguments four, five and six.

Otherwise, nicely done and I think Wade's in pretty good shape here.

Full post as published by South Florida Lawyers on May 11, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0129 secs (new cache)