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]
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that plaintiffs must present a "plausible" cause of action. Alongside Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (and together known as Twiqbal), Iqbal raised the threshold which plaintiffs needed to meet.
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]
United States v. National Treasury Employees Union, 513 U.S. 454 (1995), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Section 501(b) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The Supreme Court at first took little interest in exercising the new powers granted to the Court by the Act. [17] Then in January 1935, Charles Edward Clark, the dean of Yale Law School, published an article arguing that federal procedural reform had to include a full merger of law and equity, as had occurred in many code pleading states. [17]