Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 76 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Cousins v. Lockyer.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cousins v. Lockyer Anchor | green | “conclusory allegations of law and unwarranted inferences are insufficient to avoid a rule 12(b)(6) dismissal.” | 37 |
| 2 | Cousins v. Lockyer | green | “a complaint need not contain detailed factual allegations ... it must plead 'enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” | 25 |
| 3 | Richard Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc. | green | “a jurisdictional challenge under rule 12(b)(1) may be made either on the face of the pleadings or by presenting extrinsic evidence.” | 8 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.