State of Tennessee v. Cordricus Arnold

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a manufacturing defect by alleging “precisely how the product failed and how that failure caused [the plaintiff’s] injury”
• deducing that the pleading requirements “were designed to avoid subjecting defendants to [the consequences of a plaintiff’s] fishing expedition”
• explaining that this relaxed application of Twombly and Iqbal does not allow “fishing expedition[s]” to proceed to “lengthy and expensive discovery”
• finding complaint sufficient in products-liability case where defendant held the necessary documents
• plaintiffs need not plead “extremely detailed factual allegations” when defendants have possession of the relevant information (citation omitted)
• under a similar Louisiana law, finding validly pleaded design defect where the complaint alleged manufacturer could have used a different metal alloy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).