Legal Opinion · Dissent

Data Key Partners v. Permira Advisors LLC

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 23, 2014No. 2012AP001967Published

1DissentShirley S. Abrahamson, C.J.

¶ 67. {dissenting). I would affirm the court of appeals. I would follow Wisconsin law and conclude that as a general rule, parties need not plead specific facts at the motion-to-dismiss phase. In the instant case, although the plaintiffs raised the business judgment rule in their complaint, the plaintiffs also set forth sufficient facts to *696plead around the rule and provide notice to the defendants of the claim being alleged.1

¶ 68. The majority opinion holds that "plaintiffs must allege facts that, if true, plausibly suggest a violation of applicable law,"2 the majority opinion relies on Bell…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination UnitSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Anderson v. Continental InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API