Twombly and Iqbal establish a modest pleading standard requiring a complaint to be "plausible." The legal and academic left has been up in arms over this. Beck asks the question I've been asking for a while. "Why should the legal system tolerate the filing of implausible complaints?" I'd recommend the excellent post even if it didn't cite my previous work.
In defense of Iqbal and Twombly
- § 1920 and e-discovery costs
- Around the web, March 13
- Johnson & Johnson lawsuit thrown out
- "Twombly is the Logical Extension of the Mathews v. Eldridge Test to Discovery"
- Why is the Eastern District of Texas home to so many patent trolls?
- Loser pays in action: punishment for a patent troll
- Around the web, July 15
- How discovery rules enrich the legal profession at the expense of the social good
- "$7 million to sue Wal-Mart"?
- Around the web, June 18
- Terrible 'Sunshine in Litigation Act' rises again
- "A nation of lawyers and judges"
- Nevada Supreme Court upholds 'civil death penalty'
- "The Costs of Heightened Pleading"
- Around the web, December 9