Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The District Court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted, holding that because the very statute that created the property right in continued employment also specified the procedures for discharge, and because those procedures were followed, Loudermill was, by definition, afforded all the process due ...
Failure of consideration is a highly technical area of law. Particular areas of controversy include: Whether the failure of the consideration must be 'total', [3] and the scope and meaning of such a requirement; Whether 'consideration' refers not only to bargained-for counter-performance by the defendant, but also a legal or factual state of ...
Arthur James Lomax v. Christina Ortiz-Marquez et al., 590 U.S. ___ (2020) was a Supreme Court case in which the court held that in situations and proceedings in which a prisoner is filing to proceed In forma pauperis, as it pertains to the "3 strikes" system set out in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a dismissal without prejudice counts for failure to state a claim counts as a "strike.
The initial action in the federal District Court was dismissed for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted". [2] This is a pretrial motion available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which means that, even if everything the plaintiffs said is true, the court agrees that there is no breach of any duty owed to the ...
Pages for logged out editors learn more. Contributions; Talk; Failure to state a claim
Perhaps the best known case creating an implied cause of action for constitutional rights is Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). In that case, the United States Supreme Court ruled that an individual whose Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by federal agents could sue for the violation of the Amendment itself, despite the lack ...
Before turning to the particulars of Swanson's case, a brief review of the standards that apply to dismissals for failure to state a claim is in order. It is by now well established that a plaintiff must do better than putting a few words on paper that, in the hands of an imaginative reader, might suggest that something has happened to her that ...
The United States moved for dismissal on the basis of lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. [20] In addition, the United States claimed that the statute of limitations had run under both the Tucker Act [21] and the Indian Tucker Act, [22] the acts governing claims in the Federal Court of Claims. [19]