§Why CasetextPricing

Broom et al v. Neumann et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint

17 Cited authorities

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services

    436 U.S. 658 (1978)   Cited 66,955 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "local government . . . are 'persons'" for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983

  2. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

    528 U.S. 167 (2000)   Cited 7,131 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

  3. Foman v. Davis

    371 U.S. 178 (1962)   Cited 28,580 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an appeal was improperly dismissed when the record as a whole — including a timely but incomplete notice of appeal and a premature but complete notice — revealed the orders petitioner sought to appeal

  4. Saint Francis Coll. v. Al-Khazraji

    481 U.S. 604 (1987)   Cited 1,161 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that discrimination “based on the fact that [plaintiff] was born an Arab, rather than solely on the place or nation of his origin” will support a § 1981 claim

  5. Shane v. Fauver

    213 F.3d 113 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 3,107 times
    Holding that unless amendment would be futile, a district court must give a plaintiff the opportunity to amend a complaint that fails to state a claim

  6. Brown v. Philip Morris Inc.

    250 F.3d 789 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 1,000 times
    Holding property and contract rights are statutorily, not constitutionally, protected and therefore a conspiracy to violate those rights is an insufficient foundation for a § 1985 claim

  7. Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner

    407 U.S. 551 (1972)   Cited 464 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a private shopping center did not violate the First Amendment by prohibiting the distribution of handbills on its property

  8. Jablonski v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

    863 F.2d 289 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 754 times
    Holding that amendment of the complaint is futile if the amendment will not cure the deficiency in the original complaint or if the amended complaint cannot withstand a renewed motion to dismiss

  9. Aponte-Torres v. University of Puerto Rico

    445 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2006)   Cited 427 times
    Holding that the plaintiffs "fail[ed] to articulate a cognizable federal claim"

  10. Adams v. Gould Inc.

    739 F.2d 858 (3d Cir. 1984)   Cited 854 times
    Holding that "the mere passage of time, without more, does not require that a motion to amend a complaint be denied"

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 485,916 times   688 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 90,335 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  13. Section 1981 - Equal rights under the law

    42 U.S.C. § 1981   Cited 37,831 times   234 Legal Analyses
    Granting equal rights to "make and enforce contracts" without regard to race