Issue: Under the rules of the Seventh Circuit, what is the standard of review for a motion to dismiss a complaint?
|Area of Law:||Litigation & Procedure|
|Keywords:||Motion to dismiss; Standard of review|
|Jurisdiction:||Federal, Seventh Circuit|
|Cited Cases:||957 F.2d 339; 146 F.3d 478|
|Cited Statutes:||Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)|
The court set out in TA s "Sneed v. Rybicki, 146 F.3d 478 (7th Cir. 1998)" c 1 l "Sneed v. Rybicki, 146 F.3d 478 (7th Cir. 1998)"Sneed v. Rybicki, 146 F.3d 478 (7th Cir. 1998), the standard of review of a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6):
We review the dismissal of [plaintiff’s] complaint de novo. The dismissal is proper only if it is clear that [plaintiff] can prove no set of facts consistent with his complaint which would entitle him to relief. We accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint, and we draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party. However, we are not obliged to accept as true conclusory statements of law or unsupported conclusions of fact.
146 F.3d at 480 (citations omitted). In the context of a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the allegations of the complaint are taken as true and the plaintiffs are entitled to all reasonable inferences to be drawn from the allegations. Apostol v. Landau, 957 F.2d 339, 343 (7th Cir. 1992).