LOWE CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT, LLC v. JESSIE O. HUDGINS

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a Bivens action could be sustained against Border Patrol agents
• explaining that “conclusory statements . . . are not entitled to the presumption of truth”
• holding “a court 9 must determine whether the facts alleged in the complaint, taken as true, entitle the 10 plaintiff to a legal remedy”
• noting that the analysis under Rule 12(b)(6) and Rule 12(c) is \substantially identical\
• stating that the court is not required 6 to accept as true legal conclusions or “formulaic recitation[s] of the elements of a cause 7 of action”
• stating that the court is not required 11 to accept as true legal conclusions or “formulaic recitation[s] of the elements of a cause 12 of action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).