Richmond attorneys weigh in on Twombly and Iqbal
Richmond partner David Anthony and Richmond associate Tim St. George’s article “‘Plausibility’ Pleading After Twombly and Iqbal” was published in the July issue of the American Bar Association (ABA) and the American Law Institute’s (ALI) The Practical Litigator.
According to Anthony and St. George, in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, the United States Supreme Court announced that a “new” heightened pleading standard would govern the filing of civil complaints in federal courts. In Twombly, the Court reinterpreted the substance of Rule 8(a), holding that plaintiffs must plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” to avoid dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6).
Two years later, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court overruled the Second Circuit’s decision in Iqbal v. Hasty, 490 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2007), and held that the standard announced in Twombly governs “all civil actions and proceedings in the United States district courts.”
Written from the perspective of two former federal law clerks, Anthony and St. George’s article explores the practical implications of the decisions by: providing numerous practice “pointers”; identifying nascent trends that have emerged in the aftermath of the decisions; and offering practical advice, for both plaintiffs and defendants, on how to marshal these decisions to one’s advantage.