26 Cited authorities

Shields v. Citytrust Bancorp, Inc.
25 F.3d 1124 (2d Cir. 1994) Cited 1,842 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that scienter cannot be "base[d] . . . on speculation and conclusory allegations"
Watts v. United States
394 U.S. 705 (1969) Cited 834 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendant engaged in protected speech where he stated, "[i]f they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J," during speech at Washington Monument opposing military draft
Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation
438 U.S. 726 (1978) Cited 493 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding agency may regulate offensive speech over radio waves
Schlaifer Nance Co., Inc. v. Est. of Warhol
194 F.3d 323 (2d Cir. 1999) Cited 501 times
Holding that a motion describing the sanctionable conduct and the source of authority for the sanction provided notice
Eisemann v. Greene
204 F.3d 393 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 356 times
Holding that court cannot require that litigant obtain permission prior to filing a motion authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Intern. Controls Corp. v. Vesco
556 F.2d 665 (2d Cir. 1977) Cited 672 times
Holding that an amended complaint that must be served pursuant to Rule 5 does not become operative on filing, but only upon service
Saxe v. State College Area School District
240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001) Cited 205 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that, under Fraser, there is no First Amendment protection for lewd, vulgar, indecent, and plainly offensive speech in school
DeAngelis v. El Paso Municipal Police Officers Ass'n
51 F.3d 591 (5th Cir. 1995) Cited 229 times
Holding ten columns in association newsletter containing derogatory statements about women, only four of which referred to plaintiff, could not alone amount to actionable sexual harassment
Husain v. Springer
494 F.3d 108 (2d Cir. 2007) Cited 47 times 1 Legal Analyses
Explaining that "once a state institution. opens a limited forum to speech on a particu lar topic, it may not act against a speaker in that forum on the basis of views they express on that topic"
Gilmore v. Shearson/American Express Inc.
811 F.2d 108 (2d Cir. 1987) Cited 78 times
Holding that complaint did not "alter the scope or theory" of the claims to which one party had already explicitly waived arbitration, and therefore the waiver applied to the claims raised in the complaint
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 354,229 times 943 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 92,835 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

Guzman v. News Corporation et al

26 Cited authorities

Holding that scienter cannot be "base[d] . . . on speculation and conclusory allegations"

Holding that the defendant engaged in protected speech where he stated, "[i]f they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J," during speech at Washington Monument opposing military draft

Holding agency may regulate offensive speech over radio waves

Holding that a motion describing the sanctionable conduct and the source of authority for the sanction provided notice

Holding that court cannot require that litigant obtain permission prior to filing a motion authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Holding that an amended complaint that must be served pursuant to Rule 5 does not become operative on filing, but only upon service

Holding that, under Fraser, there is no First Amendment protection for lewd, vulgar, indecent, and plainly offensive speech in school

Holding ten columns in association newsletter containing derogatory statements about women, only four of which referred to plaintiff, could not alone amount to actionable sexual harassment

Explaining that "once a state institution. opens a limited forum to speech on a particu lar topic, it may not act against a speaker in that forum on the basis of views they express on that topic"

Holding that complaint did not "alter the scope or theory" of the claims to which one party had already explicitly waived arbitration, and therefore the waiver applied to the claims raised in the complaint

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

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