Panelists discuss how high the bar is for pleading a complaint after Iqbal and Twombly rulings

Panelists discuss how high the bar is for pleading a complaint after Iqbal and Twombly rulings

On April 6, the Dwight D. Opperman Institute of Judicial Administration sponsored a panel discussion on two recent Supreme Court rulings, known as Iqbal and Twombly. Titled "Iqbal/Twombly: A Pleading Revolution?," the event featured panelists addressing the question of whether the two cases amounted to a judicially crafted revolution of pleading under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, decided in 2007, the Court threw out an antitrust complaint, saying it did not meet required standards of pleading. Two years later, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Court made clear that its apparently heightened standard of pleading extended to all cases, not just antitrust matters. Panelists were Evan Chesler '75, the presiding partner of Cravath, Swaine & Moore; Eleanor Fox, Walter J. Derenberg Professor of Trade Regulation; John Koeltl, a U.S. District Court judge in New York; and Arthur Miller, University Professor. Russel D. Niles Professor of Law Oscar Chase moderated the event.

Video

Watch the full event (1 hr 40 min):

Posted April 18, 2010