plausible claim (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

plausible claim in North Carolina

8 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1969–2024 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Sutton v. Dukegreen
nc · 1970 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016See Sutton, 277 N.C. at 98 , 176 S.E.2d at 163 .

2016See Sutton, 277 N.C. at 98 , 176 S.E.2d at 163 .

11
Higgins v. Pattongreen
ncctapp · 1991 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008When considered in conjunction with the answer, the complaint facially presents a plausible claim for trespass." 102 N.C.App. at 306 , 401 S.E.2d at 857 (citation omitted).

2008When considered in conjunction with the answer, the complaint facially presents a plausible claim for trespass." 102 N.C.App. at 306 , 401 S.E.2d at 857 (citation omitted).

11
Bryson v. Sullivangreen
ncctapp · 1991 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
2 sentences

1991See Bryson, 102 N.C.

1991See Bryson, 102 N.C.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly green
scotus · 2007
2 sentences

2016Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 556–57 (2007) (requiring that a complaint must state a plausible claim). {53} Even North Carolina’s more lenient standard, however, does not allow a party to withstand a Rule 12(b)(6) motion based on conclusory allegations that are not supported by underlying factual allegations.

2016Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 556–57 (2007) (requiring that a complaint must state a plausible claim); see SiteLink, 2016 NCBC LEXIS 45 , at *17 (noting the difference between the federal and North Carolina Rule 12(b)(6) standards in the context of evaluating federal antitrust precedents). 28.

22016–2016
Craig Ex Rel. Craig v. New Hanover County Board of Education green
nc · 2009
1 sentence

2024We do “not predetermine the likelihood that plaintiff will win other pretrial motions, defeat affirmative defenses, or ultimately succeed on the merits of [her] case.” Craig, 363 N.C. at 341 ; cf. Davis Next Friend LaShonda D. v. Monroe Cnty.

12024–2024
United States v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority green
ncwd · 2017
2 sentences

2022Id. at 723–25. 10 In denying the hospital’s motion to dismiss, the 10 The plaintiff’s claim for restraint of trade was brought pursuant to Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which prohibits “agreements that unreasonably restrain trade.” Atrium, 248 F. Supp. 3d at 725 . court concluded that the plaintiffs had satisfied their burden under the federal Rule 12 standard by stating a plausible claim for restraint of trade by alleging both direct and indirect adverse effects on competition.

2022Id. at 723–25. 10 In denying the hospital’s motion to dismiss, the 10 The plaintiff’s claim for restraint of trade was brought pursuant to Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which prohibits “agreements that unreasonably restrain trade.” Atrium, 248 F. Supp. 3d at 725 . court concluded that the plaintiffs had satisfied their burden under the federal Rule 12 standard by stating a plausible claim for restraint of trade by alleging both direct and indirect adverse effects on competition.

12022–2022
Frank H. Conner Co. v. Spanish Inns Charlotte, Ltd. green
· 1978
1 sentence

1978Connor Company v. Spanish Inns Charlotte, Limited et al, 294 N.C. 661 , 242 S.E. 2d 789 (1978), said: “Rule 56(e) requires that if a defendant, opposing a plaintiff’s motion, has a plausible defense as regards an issue, he must assert it, or he must utilize Rule 56(f) to show the court why he cannot oppose it.

11978–1978
Howard Ross v. United States green
cadc · 1965
1 sentence

1969Id. at 215 .

11969–1969

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IL 105 (1973–2026) MA 73 (1984–2026) PA 57 (2006–2026) NY 52 (1883–2025) AL 41 (1911–2018) CO 36 (2014–2026) CA 27 (1955–2026) OH 26 (1997–2026) TX 22 (1981–2024) LA 21 (1974–2024) DC 18 (1967–2025) NJ 12 (1985–2022) VI 12 (2011–2025) NE 9 (2016–2025) WA 9 (1996–2020) NC 8 (1969–2024) UT 8 (2006–2020) WI 5 (2014–2023) DE 5 (2014–2025) GA 5 (2017–2026) MI 4 (1975–2020) NM 4 (2001–2022) MO 4 (1905–2017) AZ 4 (2020–2025) TN 4 (1980–2013) ME 3 (1975–2013) HI 3 (2018–2021) MD 3 (2003–2009) CT 3 (1995–2016) OK 3 (2001–2013) IA 3 (2011–2024) NV 3 (1997–2021) WV 3 (2020–2020) KY 2 (1992–2021) ID 2 (1963–2012) MS 2 (2017–2020) FL 2 (1979–2016) MN 2 (2024–2025) RI 2 (2009–2014) SD 2 (2022–2026)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check