§Why CasetextPricing

Doe v. Lt. Gen. Franklin Lee Hagenbeck et.al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 15 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document

111 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 254,855 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 268,629 times   366 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Pearson v. Callahan

    555 U.S. 223 (2009)   Cited 22,623 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may, without deciding whether there was a constitutional violation, look to the question of whether that right was "clearly established"

  4. Hope v. Pelzer

    536 U.S. 730 (2002)   Cited 7,437 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he obvious cruelty inherent" in putting inmates in certain wantonly "degrading and dangerous" situations provides officers "with some notice that their alleged conduct violate" the Eighth Amendment

  5. Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents

    403 U.S. 388 (1971)   Cited 25,980 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is an implied cause of action for money damages against federal officials for violations of the Fourth Amendment

  6. Deshaney v. Winnebago Cty. Soc. Servs. Dept

    489 U.S. 189 (1989)   Cited 5,643 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that negligence by a county social services department which left a child permanently brain damaged by his abusive father did not shock the conscience

  7. United States v. Lanier

    520 U.S. 259 (1997)   Cited 2,410 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts should look to prior judicial decisions interpreting a statute in considering whether it is vague

  8. Triestman v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

    470 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 2006)   Cited 7,726 times
    Holding that the discretionary function doctrine does not shield a "BOP employee's failure to perform a diligent inspection out of laziness, hastiness, or inattentiveness"

  9. United States v. Gaubert

    499 U.S. 315 (1991)   Cited 2,386 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the discretionary function exception only protects actions “grounded in the policy of the regulatory regime”

  10. Ingraham v. Wright

    430 U.S. 651 (1977)   Cited 4,031 times
    Holding that reasonable "corporal punishment serves important educational interests" and is therefore permissible in public schools

  11. Section 1346 - United States as defendant

    28 U.S.C. § 1346   Cited 24,127 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"

  12. Section 1295 - Jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

    28 U.S.C. § 1295   Cited 8,334 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Granting jurisdiction to the Federal Circuit over cases arising from executive agency board of contract appeals

  13. Section 1491 - Claims against United States generally; actions involving Tennessee Valley Authority

    28 U.S.C. § 1491   Cited 4,646 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the standard in 5 U.S.C. § 706

  14. Section 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

    18 U.S.C. § 242   Cited 3,870 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Noting that "if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section," the defendant "shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both"

  15. Section 2005 - Advanced education assistance: active duty agreement; reimbursement requirements

    10 U.S.C. § 2005   Cited 29 times
    Stating that when a cadet fails to meet the educational requirements specified in his service agreement and cannot complete the specified period of active-duty service, he "shall be subject to repayment provisions"

  16. Section 113 - Secretary of Defense

    10 U.S.C. § 113   Cited 18 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) (1) There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. (2) A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense- (A) within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force in a grade below O-7; or (B) within 10 years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force

  17. Section 103.5 - Responsibilities

    32 C.F.R. § 103.5   Cited 2 times

    (a) In accordance with the authority in DoD policy (see paragraph (t) of Appendix A to this part), the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)) shall: (1) Develop overall policy and provide oversight for the DoD SAPR Program, except legal processes in the UCMJ and criminal investigative matters assigned to the Judge Advocates General of the Military Departments, the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and IG DoD, respectively. (2) Develop strategic