the detaded arbitration award [Sun and Cudu] have made a recovery for ad of the injuries they assert against SGS in this action.” II. On appeal, Sun and Cudu contend that the district court erred when it found that Sun and Cudu already had recovered at arbitration for ad of the injuries they asserted against SGS in this action. We review de novo a decision of the lower court on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Brooks v. City of Winston-Salem, N.C., 85 F.3d 178 (4th Cir.1996). Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is appropriate when, accepting as true the well-pleaded facts in the complaint and viewing them in the dght most favorable to the plaintiffs, the court finds with certainty that a plaintiff would not be entitled to relief under any set of facts that co 38 (4th Cir.2000)(<HOLDING>). As did the district court, we too find the
holding that one of the principal purposes of the qualified immunity doctrine is to shield officers not only from liability but also from defending against a lawsuit holding that the plaintiffs liability to the defendant was absolved as a result of the bankruptcy order and the defendants were barred from collecting debts from property of the plaintiffs holding the rule is an equitable doctrine that operates to reduce a plaintiffs recovery from the nonsettling defendant to prevent the plaintiff from recovering twice from the same assessment of liability recognizing that the alter ego doctrine is an equitable doctrine which should be used to prevent inequitable results recognizing that plaintiffs are prohibited from recovering in tort economic losses to which their entitlement flows only from a contract