JNS Holding Corp (JNSH)

[Stock_Barber]

Folks know what they hold here. The majority of shares are held by the posters here on the board who have invested in JNSH for many reasons. I suspect few have bought shares just because of a hope of dismissal. The ruling information was available yesterday to those close to the case, and we saw what, a 150k market order? We also saw a 1.1M share buy! While an outright dismissal would have been great, it was only one possible positive outcome.

I am satisfied that the totality of plaintiffs’ allegations meets the liberal pleading requirements of Rule 8 as to their claim for tortious interference with contractual relations.

All CCGI had to do to avoid the dismissal was to meet the minimal liberal pleading requirements of Rule 8 to make the claim. A very low bar to hurdle. All it says is that there is a legal basis to allow the lawsuit, it is NOT a ruling on evidence or facts. Read the terms below... not sure how one could ever get a case dismissed with this low of a bar...

Rule 8(a) created the liberal notice pleading standard, requires only "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that P is entitled to relief."
Evolution of requirements to survive Rule 12(b)(6) motions (test of legal sufficiency of the complaint, not evidentiary sufficiency)…
•Complaint should not be dismissed unless P can prove "no set of facts" in support of the claim that would entitle him to relief. (Conley)
•Complaint that fails to cite a statute or to cite the correct one, in no way affects the merits of a claim. (Northrop)
•Complaint that follows 8(a)(2) can still be dismissed if it fails to state a legal claim. (Kirksey)
•Complaint must have "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," must cross the line from "conceivable to plausible". (Twombly)
•Complaint cannot be comprised of only "conclusory statements …that do not have to be assumed as true." (Iqbal)
?Heightened pleading standards
•Rule 9(b) requires that "the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity."
•If a heightened pleading standard isn't required by Rule 9(b) or expressly by statute, there probably isn't one (Leatherman)[/I]