Topic: need not accept as true unwarranted inferences, unreasonabl… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #5552

5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 61 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 Painter's Mill Grille, LLC v. Howard Brown.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Painter's Mill Grille, LLC v. Howard Brown Anchor
ca4 · 2013
green “need not accept as true unwarranted inferences, unreasonable conclusions, or arguments,” 24
2 Holloway v. Pagan River Dockside Seafood, Inc.
ca4 · 2012
green “whether the plaintiff has a right to be in the district court at all and whether the court has the power to hear and dispose of the claim.” 22
3 Fent v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board
ca10 · 2000
green “constitutes a bar to the exercise of federal subject matter jurisdiction” 6
4 Adams v. Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority
ca4 · 2013
green “while a pro se litigant's pleadings are liberally construed, a pro se complaint must still contain sufficient facts to raise a right to relief above the speculative level and state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” 6
5 Fent v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board
ca10 · 2000
green “immunity constitutes a bar to the exercise of federal subject matter jurisdiction.” 3

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.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check