Also known as: threadbare recitals · threadbare recital · conclusory allegations
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action unsupported by factual allegations. Courts disregard such statements on a motion to dismiss and examine only the remaining well-pleaded facts to determine whether they plausibly support relief rather than mere possibility.
Elliot sued NovaLend alleging that executives lied about default rates and cooked the books. The complaint compared marketing materials to later reports but named no executive, meeting, or document showing knowledge or intent. After setting aside the conclusory labels, the court found no factual content allowing a plausible inference of fraud and granted the motion to dismiss.
Friends of the Earth sued Laidlaw claiming repeated permit violations harmed members who used the river. The complaint stated only that members were concerned about pollution without describing any specific visits, injuries, or plans to return. The court treated the generalized harm assertions as threadbare, disregarded them, and dismissed for lack of injury-in-fact facts.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Swierkiewicz sued Sorema alleging termination on account of national origin and age. The complaint recited the statutory elements and asserted discriminatory motive without identifying any comparator, statement, or circumstance supporting the claim. After setting aside the bare recital as threadbare, the court granted the motion to dismiss for failure to state a plausible claim.
Residents sued state officials alleging that legislative districts diluted their votes. The complaint asserted that the apportionment impaired equal representation but supplied no demographic data, voting patterns, or specific effects on any plaintiff. The court found the allegations too conclusory to present a justiciable controversy under the Equal Protection Clause.
Smith sued state officials claiming the registration statute violated due process. The complaint stated only that the law imposed punishment without any factual description of Smith's circumstances or how the requirements affected him personally. The court dismissed the claim because the threadbare assertion failed to allege facts supporting a plausible constitutional violation.
Lugar sued Edmondson Oil alleging that the company used state attachment procedures to seize property without due process. The complaint asserted joint action with the state but provided no facts showing that the company acted under color of law beyond invoking the statute. The court held that the conclusory joint-action allegation did not state a plausible Section 1983 claim.
A threadbare recitation merely repeats the legal elements of a claim without supporting facts. A well-pleaded allegation supplies concrete details that allow a court to draw a reasonable inference of liability when accepted as true.
Supporting sources
No. Courts disregard threadbare recitations and test only the remaining factual allegations for plausibility. If those facts do not nudge the claim across the line from conceivable to plausible, the complaint is dismissed.
Supporting sources
Parallel conduct plus a bare assertion of agreement or conspiracy remains consistent with lawful independent action. Without additional factual content showing a meeting of the minds, the claim fails the plausibility test.
Supporting sources
Attached affidavits that supply specific factual details may provide the necessary enhancement. Generalized affidavits that merely repeat conclusory statements do not cure the defect.
Supporting sources
…action as "a massive repudiation of the experience of our whole past." Another describes the complaint as merely asserting conclusory allegations that Tennessee's apportionment is "incorrect," "arbitrary," "obsolete," and "unconstitutional." I believe it can be shown that this case is distinguishable from earlier cases dealing with…