Case Name: Rhonda Hill WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony TARRICONE, Kriendler and Kreindler Law Firm, 710 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10007, American Association for Justice, 777 North 6th Street, Northwest, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20001, FKA Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-05-02
Citations: 563 F. App'x 864
Docket Number: No. 13-4321-CV
Parties: Rhonda Hill WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony TARRICONE, Kriendler and Kreindler Law Firm, 710 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10007, American Association for Justice, 777 North 6th Street, Northwest, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20001, FKA Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges, and J. GARVAN MURTHA, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 563
Pages: 864–865

Head Matter:
Rhonda Hill WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony TARRICONE, Kriendler and Kreindler Law Firm, 710 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10007, American Association for Justice, 777 North 6th Street, Northwest, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20001, FKA Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-4321-CV.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
May 2, 2014.
Rhonda Hill Wilson, Esq., Philadelphia, PA, pro se.
Stephen D. Susman, Chanler A. Lang-ham, Susman Godfrey, L.L.P., Houston, TX, for Appellee the American Association for Justice; Robert S. Peck, Center for Constitutional Litigation, P.C., Washington, DC, for Appellee Anthony Tarricone.
PRESENT: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges, and J. GARVAN MURTHA, District Judge.
The Honorable J. Garvan Murtha, of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-Appellant Rhonda Hill Wilson, an attorney proceeding pro se, appeals the judgement of the district court (Swain, J.) entered on September 30, 2013 granting Defendants-Appellees the American Association for Justice ("AAJ") and Anthony Tarricone's (an attorney and former president of AAJ) motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.
"We review de novo a district court's dismissal of a complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), construing the complaint liberally, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true, and drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs favor." Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 152 (2d Cir.2002). The complaint must plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007), and "allow[ ] the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged," Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). Although all allegations contained in the complaint are assumed to be true, this tenet is "inapplicable to legal conclusions." Id. After an independent review of the record and relevant case law, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its September 26, 2013 order.
We have considered all of Wilson's arguments and conclude that they are without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.