IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The Second Circuit’s Starr Decision: Why Twombly Demands More

Listed author(s):
  • Aaron Panner
Registered author(s):

    But the Second Circuit’s decision, by allowing a vague set of factual allegations and an equally vague set of claimed violations to proceed past a motion to dismiss, ignored Twombly’s most basic lesson: An antitrust plaintiff, in the absence of any direct claim of agreement, must support a claim of conspiracy with clear factual allegations and persuasive inferences. Aaron S. Panner, Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Requires login and subscription

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Competition Policy International in its journal CPI Journal MAR-10(2).

    Volume (Year): 3 (2010)
    Issue (Month): ()

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:cpi:atchrn:3.2.2010:i=5478
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpi:atchrn:3.2.2010:i=5478. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lindsay McSweeney)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.