{ "id": "R41077", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R41077", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 372259, "date": "2010-07-01", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:35:29.853537", "title": "Civil Pleading Requirements After Bell Atlantic Corporation v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal", "summary": "In 2007 and 2009 decisions, Bell Atlantic Corporation v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the U.S. Supreme Court heightened the standard governing whether a civil complaint filed in federal court will survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. After those rulings, it appears that federal courts must evaluate the \u201cplausibility\u201d of claims made at the pleading stage. Previously, complaints typically survived a motion to dismiss as long as they stated a claim for which some set of facts could be assembled to warrant legal relief. The change makes it less likely for plaintiffs\u2019 claims to survive past the initial pleadings stage, particularly in cases in which plaintiffs may need to rely on the discovery of evidence once litigation begins in order to bolster their claims. Bills pending in the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, the Open Access to Courts Act of 2009 (H.R. 4115) and the Notice Pleading Restoration Act of 2009 (S. 1504), aim to reverse the effects of the Twombly and Iqbal decisions.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41077", "sha1": "d104f9922e061b8fef438bebe421b1ba2c106e7a", "filename": "files/20100701_R41077_d104f9922e061b8fef438bebe421b1ba2c106e7a.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41077", "sha1": "ef0520eb141351ad3ea1297d202b000d0b138a80", "filename": "files/20100701_R41077_ef0520eb141351ad3ea1297d202b000d0b138a80.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [] }