Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 2007, the United States Supreme Court overruled Conley, creating a new, stricter standard of a pleading's required specificity.Under the standard the Court set forth in Conley, a complaint need only state facts which make it "conceivable" that it could prove its legal claims—that is, that a court could only dismiss a claim if it appeared, beyond a doubt, that the plaintiff would be able ...
In his New York Practice column, Patrick M. Connors analyzes 'Mid-Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union v. Quartararo & Lois', a case which addressed pleading requirements. Court of Appeals Addresses ...
Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), is an opinion given by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court overruled Monroe v. Pape by holding that a local government is a "person" subject to suit under Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code: Civil action for deprivation of rights. [1]
The New York State Court of Appeals is the state's highest court. In civil cases, appeals are taken almost exclusively from decisions of the Appellate Divisions. In criminal cases, depending on the type of case and the part of the state in which it arose, appeals can be heard from decisions of the Appellate Division, the Appellate Term, and the County Court.
New York's rules of civil procedure allow for interlocutory appeals of right from nearly every order and decision of the trial court, [6] meaning that most may be appealed to the appropriate appellate department while the case is still pending in the trial court.[[Map of the four departments of the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
The Supreme Court eventually responded in 2007 with a decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, and again in 2009 with a decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which together imposed new standards for specificity and "plausibility" in pleadings. [4] [5] [6]
The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear Democratic former New York state lieutenant governor Brian Benjamin's challenge to corruption charges involving campaign contributions from a ...
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision involving First Amendment free speech protections for government employees. The plaintiff in the case was a district attorney who claimed that he had been passed up for a promotion for criticizing the legitimacy of a warrant.