657 F. Supp. 2d 1113 - Thompson v. Paul’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. · Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie · Agostini v. Felton Chancellor Board of Education of the City of New York · Arizona v. California
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“motion under Rule 12(b)(6) may not be used to challenge only certain allegations within a claim”) (citing Thompson v. Paul, 657 F.Supp.2d 1113, 1129 (D.Ariz.2009) (stating that “[t]he Court is unaware, however, of any situation in which a Rule 12(b)(6) motion may be used to strike certain allegations in support of a claim, where the underlying claim itself is not challenged”)). And, ordinarily,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.