Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2399322
 


 



Brief of Professors of Civil Procedure as Amici Curiae in Wood v. Moss, No. 13-115


Allan Ides


Loyola Law School Los Angeles

Simona Grossi


Loyola Law School Los Angeles

February 21, 2014

Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2014-5

Abstract:     
In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), the Court established the standards to determine whether a complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted. That determination focuses on the elements of the claim and on the non-conclusory, factual matter alleged in that complaint. The sufficiency of a complaint must be established by reference to the alleged facts and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom. The question is whether those allegations and inferences plausibly suggest a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Wood v. Moss, No. 13-115, now pending before the Supreme Court, raises the issue of what constitutes a reasonable inference under the Twombly-Iqbal standard. In our view, a reasonable inference is one on which reasonable minds may differ. It need not be the exclusive inference one may draw from the facts. Rather, it need only fall within the range of sensible, rational alternatives.

We argue that the Court should adopt an approach to reasonable inferences that does not impose a restrictive pleading regime that is inconsistent with the principles underlying Rules 8(a)(2) and 12(b)(6) or with the Court’s decisions in Twombly and Iqbal. The endorsed standard should recognize the primary role of district courts in making what is essentially a practical and commonsense judgment as to which inferences may be sufficient to support a claim. Certainly, a mechanical formula intended to instruct courts on how to identify a reasonable inference would serve neither the ends of justice nor principles of sound case-management.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 31

working papers series





Download This Paper

Date posted: February 22, 2014  

Suggested Citation

Ides, Allan and Grossi, Simona, Brief of Professors of Civil Procedure as Amici Curiae in Wood v. Moss, No. 13-115 (February 21, 2014). Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2014-5. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2399322 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2399322

Contact Information

Allan Ides
Loyola Law School Los Angeles ( email )
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
United States
213-736-1464 (Phone)
213-380-3769 (Fax)
Simona Grossi (Contact Author)
Loyola Law School Los Angeles ( email )
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
United States
213-736-8140 (Phone)
213-380-3769 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 159
Downloads: 22

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.485 seconds