Jones v. Buttarazzi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s Section 1981 claim under Rule 12(b)(6) where plaintiff’s allegations did “not provide sufficient detail to create a plausible inference that [defendant’s] actions were because of [plaintiff’s] race”
• finding assertions that Plaintiff was treated “differently than Caucasian physicians similarly situated” and that “minority physicians are scrutinized more harshly by [WakeMed] than are Caucasian physicians” did not suffice to state a 1981 claim
• “‘Labels, conclusions, recitation of a claim’s elements, and naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement will not suffice to meet the Rule 8 pleading standard.’”
• “To be sure, allowing litigants a ‘second bite at the apple’ via a motion to reconsider is disfavored.”
• “A plaintiff must also show that the interference with a contractual interest would not have happened but for the plaintiff's race.”
• “A plaintiff must [ ] show that the interference with a contractual interest would not have happened but for the plaintiff’s race.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).