Bell Atlantic v. Twombly : how motions to dismiss become (disguised) summary judgments /

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Author / Creator:Epstein, Richard Allen, 1943- author.
Imprint:[Chicago, Illinois] : Law School, University of Chicago, 2008.
Description:1 online resource (33 pages)
Language:English
Series:John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper ; no. 403 (2d series)
John M. Olin Program in Law & Economics working paper ; 2nd ser., no. 403.
Subject:
Format: E-Resource Book
URL for this record:http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/8919614
Hidden Bibliographic Details
Varying Form of Title:Bell Atlantic versus Twombly
Notes:"April 2008."
Includes bibliographical references.
Title from online title page (viewed October 11, 2012).
Summary:"The recent Supreme Court decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly stands at the crossroads of antitrust and civil procedure. As an antitrust case, Twombly makes sense on structural grounds. The FCC regulation of the telecommunications industry, and the many innocent explanations as to why each telecommunications company would stay out of its rival's territories obviated the need for further discovery. But in many other contexts, including Conley v. Gibson - case involving potential breach of the duty of fair representation on matters of racial discrimination - discovery could flesh out the relevant factual issues. The Supreme Court's general disapproval of Conley sweeps far too wide. Discovery should only be denied when the plausible inferences that can be drawn from the complaint and publicly available evidence clearly imply further discovery is of little value. Accordingly, the Federal Rules of Civil procedure should explicitly acknowledge that in a small set of cases motions on the pleadings can properly function as truncated and disguised motions for summary judgment."

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a2200000 i 4500
001 8919614
003 ICU
005 20121011144300.0
006 m d
007 cr b||||||||||
008 121011s2008 ilu ob 000 0 eng c
035 |a (OCoLC)812528968 
040 |a CGU  |b eng  |e rda  |c CGU 
042 |a pcc 
043 |a n-us--- 
049 |a CGUA 
050 4 |a KF8840  |b .E67 2008 
100 1 |a Epstein, Richard Allen,  |d 1943-  |e author.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n77013251  |1 http://viaf.org/viaf/108205709 
245 1 0 |a Bell Atlantic v. Twombly :  |b how motions to dismiss become (disguised) summary judgments /  |c Richard A. Epstein. 
246 3 |a Bell Atlantic versus Twombly 
264 1 |a [Chicago, Illinois] :  |b Law School, University of Chicago,  |c 2008. 
300 |a 1 online resource (33 pages) 
336 |a text  |2 rdacontent  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/contentTypes/txt 
337 |a computer  |2 rdamedia  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/mediaTypes/c 
338 |a online resource  |2 rdacarrier  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/carriers/cr 
490 1 |a John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper ;  |v no. 403 (2d series) 
500 |a "April 2008." 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references. 
520 |a "The recent Supreme Court decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly stands at the crossroads of antitrust and civil procedure. As an antitrust case, Twombly makes sense on structural grounds. The FCC regulation of the telecommunications industry, and the many innocent explanations as to why each telecommunications company would stay out of its rival's territories obviated the need for further discovery. But in many other contexts, including Conley v. Gibson - case involving potential breach of the duty of fair representation on matters of racial discrimination - discovery could flesh out the relevant factual issues. The Supreme Court's general disapproval of Conley sweeps far too wide. Discovery should only be denied when the plausible inferences that can be drawn from the complaint and publicly available evidence clearly imply further discovery is of little value. Accordingly, the Federal Rules of Civil procedure should explicitly acknowledge that in a small set of cases motions on the pleadings can properly function as truncated and disguised motions for summary judgment." 
588 |a Title from online title page (viewed October 11, 2012). 
650 0 |a Civil procedure  |z United States.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2008100983 
650 0 |a Antitrust law  |z United States.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2007100529 
650 0 |a Discovery (Law)  |z United States.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2008102196 
650 0 |a Summary judgments  |z United States. 
650 7 |a Antitrust law.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00810849 
650 7 |a Civil procedure.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00862585 
650 7 |a Discovery (Law)  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00894962 
650 7 |a Summary judgments.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst01138490 
651 7 |a United States.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst01204155 
830 0 |a John M. Olin Program in Law & Economics working paper ;  |v 2nd ser., no. 403. 
856 4 0 |u http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/403.pdf 
856 4 0 |u http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1126359 
903 |a HeVa 
929 |a cat 
999 f f |i 9dc0c7c0-80fd-5341-a082-98103693c9a7  |s 42124efd-1639-538b-b954-fd609a81014d 
928 |t Library of Congress classification  |a XXKF8840.E67 2008  |l Online  |c UC-FullText  |u http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1126359  |g ebooks  |i 7320864 
928 |t Library of Congress classification  |a XXKF8840.E67 2008  |l Online  |c UC-FullText  |u http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/403.pdf  |g ebooks  |i 7328465