Also known as: no causes of action · failure to state a claim
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A determination that a plaintiff's allegations fail to identify a legally recognized right to relief. The court treats the pleaded facts as true yet concludes that no doctrine supplies a remedy for the asserted injury. Dismissal follows because the complaint states no claim upon which relief can be granted.
Nadia Novak sued Norton Bank alleging that a teller once spoke to her rudely during a routine deposit. The complaint contained no allegation of any contractual term breached or any statute violated. The court dismissed the action because the facts, even if true, supplied no basis for relief.
Nikhil Narayan alleged that federal narcotics agents entered his apartment without a warrant, searched his belongings, and arrested him in front of his family. The complaint sought damages directly under the Fourth Amendment. The court recognized an implied cause of action and allowed the suit to proceed.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Natasha Nielsen sued Naveen Nanda after their long relationship ended, claiming an oral agreement to share earnings and assets equally. The complaint rested on contract principles rather than marital status. The court held that the allegations stated a valid cause of action and denied dismissal.
Nathaniel Newman and other employees sued their union for failing to pursue grievances over seniority rights. The complaint alleged only that the union had not acted, without further factual detail. The court held that the bare allegation stated a cause of action and refused to dismiss.
Neil Nair sued federal officials claiming that a policy of harsh confinement violated his constitutional rights. The complaint offered only conclusory assertions without factual content showing personal involvement. The court dismissed the action for failure to state a plausible claim.
Naveen Nanda sued Chicago police officers who entered his home without a warrant and ransacked his belongings. The complaint asserted a federal constitutional violation under color of state law. The court held that the allegations stated a cause of action and permitted the suit to continue.
A complaint fails when the facts alleged, taken as true, do not identify any legally recognized right to relief. The court examines whether the pleaded conduct violates a duty or statute that supplies a remedy. If no such right exists, dismissal is required even before discovery begins.
Supporting sources
No. A plaintiff may still state a cause of action by alleging a direct violation of the Constitution. The court treats the existence of an implied remedy as a merits question rather than a jurisdictional bar, provided the claim is not wholly insubstantial.
Supporting sources
A complaint must contain enough factual content to permit a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable. Conclusory labels or formulaic recitations of elements are insufficient. The court applies this plausibility test at the motion-to-dismiss stage before any evidence is taken.
Supporting sources
…statute for several reasons violates the Federal Constitution. The District Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, relying on Doe v. Commonwealth's Attorney for the City of Richmond , 403 F. Supp. 1199 (ED Va. 1975), which this Court summarily affirmed, 425 U. S. 901 (1976). A divided panel of the…