|
Based on your IP address, your paper is being delivered by:
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
New York, USA
Processing request.
|
Illinois, USA
Processing request.
|
Brussels, Belgium
Processing request.
|
Seoul, Korea
Processing request.
|
California, USA
Processing request.
|
If you have any problems downloading this paper,
please click on another Download Location above, or
File name: SSRN-id1584776. ; Size: 157K
|
|
Pleading Standards after Bell Atlantic v. Twombly
Scott Dodson
University of California Hastings College of the Law
April 5, 2010
Virginia Law Review in Brief, Vol. 93, p. 135, 2007
Abstract:
In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the Supreme Court repudiated the familiar language from Conley v. Gibson, that a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitled him to relief. This essay critiques Bell Atlantic and discusses some of its implications for pleading claims in the future.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 9
Keywords: pleading, motion to dismiss, Rule 8, Rule 12, 12(b)(6), Bell Atlantic, Twombly, Gibson, Conley, no set of facts
Accepted Paper Series
Download This Paper
Date posted: July 12, 2007
; Last revised: November 12, 2012
Suggested CitationDodson, Scott, Pleading Standards after Bell Atlantic v. Twombly (April 5, 2010). Virginia Law Review in Brief, Vol. 93, p. 135, 2007. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=995592
|
| Feedback to SSRN (Beta) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
