Top Banner
Wed., Sept. 3
47
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Wed., Sept. 3

Page 2: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly

(U.S. 2007)

Page 3: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Did the plaintiffs state a claim?

Page 4: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Paragraph 51“In the absence of any meaningful competition between the [baby bells] in one another’s markets, and in light of the parallel course of conduct that each engaged in to prevent competition from [locals] within their respective local telephone and/or high speed internet services markets and the other facts and market circumstances alleged above, Plaintiffs allege upon information and belief that Defendants have entered into a contract, combination or conspiracy to prevent entry in their respective local telephone and/or high speed internet service markets and have agreed not to compete with one another and otherwise allocated customers and markets to one another.”

Page 5: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

What 8(a)(2) violated then?

Were the defendants not put on notice about the nature of the

alleged agreement?

Page 6: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

So what is the problem with the complaint then?

Page 7: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Is there enough evidence at the pleading stage to justify the burden of discovery on the

defendant?

Page 8: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Souter:Asking for plausible grounds to infer an agreement does not impose a probability requirement at the pleading stage; it simply calls for enough fact to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of illegal agreement.

Page 9: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Assume that the complaint had alleged a handshake agreement among the CEOs of the baby bells at a particular meeting and named the date. No evidence is offered at all. Is Twombly satisfied?

Page 10: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Did Sierocinski’s complaint satisfy Twombly?

Page 11: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Six months after the dismissal in Twombly, the plaintiffs’ lawyers find in the trash outside various baby bells’ offices memos indicating that the baby bells were intentionally coordinating their behavior in just the manner that the Twombly complaint suggested.They file a new complaint in federal court with this evidence described.What result?

Page 12: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Aschcroft v. Iqbal(U.S. 2009)

Page 13: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

What are the alleged facts that the plaintiff claims entitle him to

relief?

Page 14: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Does Iqbal state a claim?

Page 15: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Are the defendants put on notice about the subject matter of the

suit?

Page 16: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

What is wrong with the complaint then?

Page 17: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

- P sues D for negligence in federal court- In his answer, D adds a counterclaim asking for the damages that D sustained due to P’s negligence in the same accident- Do the standards in Twiqbal apply to the allegations of P’s negligence in the counterclaim?

Page 18: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

- Rule 8. General Rules of Pleading

(a) Claim for Relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:...(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief...

Page 19: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

- P sues D for negligence in federal court- In his answer, D introduces the defense of contributory negligence- Do the standards in Twiqbal apply to the allegations of P’s negligence in the affirmative defense?

Page 20: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

pleading special matters(fraud)

Page 21: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Rule 9. Pleading Special Matters ... (b) Fraud or Mistake; Conditions of Mind. In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person’s mind may be alleged generally.

Page 22: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Why the heightened pleading standards for fraud?

Page 23: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

fraud- statement (omission if duty to speak)- of material fact- that is false (or misleading)- with knowledge of falsity

often intent that plaintiff rely

- reasonable reliance on statement by plaintiff- causation of damages

Page 24: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Does R 9(b) apply to affirmative defenses?

Page 25: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Why the exception in 9(b) for scienter?

Page 26: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Is there a tension between R 9(b) and Twiqbal?

Page 27: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers;

Representations to the Court; Sanctions

Page 28: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Are frivolous cases a problem?

Page 29: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(a) Signature. Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in

the attorney’s name — or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented. The paper must state the signer’s address, e-mail address, and telephone number. Unless a

rule or statute specifically states otherwise, a pleading need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit. The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney’s

or party’s attention.

Page 30: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper — whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it — an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

Page 31: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

Page 32: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;

Page 33: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

Page 34: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(d) Inapplicability to Discovery. This rule does not apply to disclosures and discovery requests, responses, objections, and motions under Rules 26 through 37.

Page 35: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

35

Murphy v. Cuomo(N.D.N.Y. 1996)

Page 36: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Does Murphy state a claim?

Page 37: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Does Murphy satisfy Twiqbal?

Page 38: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

Page 39: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

39

• Each allegation in the complaint was prefaced with the following statement:

“The following allegation is likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery:”

Page 40: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Can a plaintiff lose at summary judgment and nevertheless have satisfied R11(b)(3) at the pleading stage?

Page 41: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

Can a plaintiff defeat a motion for summary judgment and nevertheless have satisfied R11(b)(3) at the pleading stage?

Page 42: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;

Page 43: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

43

• The invocation of the drug statute was prefaced by the following:“We would like the law to be extended such that a private right of action should be read into this statute.”

Page 44: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

44

• There is a non-frivolous argument for the drug statute’s having a private right of action, but it is never employed by the plaintiff.

Page 45: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

11(c)(1) In General. If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that Rule 11(b) has been violated, the court may impose an appropriate sanction on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule or is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm must be held jointly responsible for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee.

Page 46: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

11(c)(4) - A sanction imposed under this rule must be limited to what suffices to deter repetition of the conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated. The sanction may include nonmonetary directives; an order to pay a penalty into court; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses directly resulting from the violation.

Page 47: Wed., Sept. 3. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (U.S. 2007)

11(c)(5) Limitations on Monetary Sanctions. The court must not impose a monetary sanction:

(A) against a represented party for violating Rule 11(b)(2)…