Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that provided a basis for a broad reading of the "short and plain statement" requirement for pleading under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [1]
In law, a summary order is a determination made by a court without issuing a legal opinion. This disposition is also known as a nonopinion, summary opinion, affirmance without opinion, unpublished order, disposition without opinion, or abbreviated disposition. It is not to be confused with summary judgment, which means a decision without trial.
The Summary Jurisdiction Act 1848 repealed and consolidated the provisions of a large number of earlier acts. The Summary Jurisdiction Act 1857 provided a mode of appeal to the High Court by case stated as to questions of law raised in summary proceedings. The Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879 amended the procedure in many details with the view of ...
Summary contempt proceeding, a proceeding to adjudicate contempt in the immediate presence of the court, without pleading, affidavit, or formal charges—albeit the accused may be entitled to a hearing or at least opportunity to make an explanation of his conduct under oath. 17 Am J2d Contpt §§ 86–88.
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 26, 2002. The Court held that for complaints in employment discrimination cases, a plaintiff is not required to allege specific facts that establish a prima facie case as required by the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework.
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provide in rule 7(f) that "the court may direct the government to file a bill of particulars".. In U.S. state law, the bill of particulars was abolished in nearly all court systems in the 1940s and 1950s due to the widespread recognition that much of the information requested could be obtained more efficiently through the discovery process.
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States involving antitrust law and civil procedure.Authored by Justice David Souter, it established that parallel conduct, absent evidence of agreement, is insufficient to sustain an antitrust action under Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
South Carolina's Coastal Zone Management Act (1977) required owners of coast land in "critical areas" near beaches to obtain permits from Respondent South Carolina Coastal Council before committing the land to new uses. The Beachfront Management Act, passed two years after Lucas's purchase of the lots, effectively prevented Petitioner Lucas ...