67 Cited authorities

Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A.
534 U.S. 506 (2002) Cited 16,796 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"
Albright v. Oliver
510 U.S. 266 (1994) Cited 12,435 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiff’s § 1983 claim failed where the plaintiff failed to establish that he was deprived of a substantive due process right secured by the Constitution
Village of Willowbrook v. Olech
528 U.S. 562 (2000) Cited 6,378 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"
Hishon v. King Spalding
467 U.S. 69 (1984) Cited 12,445 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding Title VII applies to selection for non-employee positions if consideration for that position can be regarded as one of "terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" of a covered job
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Meyer
510 U.S. 471 (1994) Cited 7,028 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding a Bivens claim does not lie against federal agencies because, if damages claims were permitted against federal agencies, "there would be no reason for aggrieved parties to bring damages actions against individual officers" and thus "the deterrent effects of the Bivens remedy would be lost"
Scheuer v. Rhodes
416 U.S. 232 (1974) Cited 22,309 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that executive branch officers had qualified immunity
Conley v. Gibson
355 U.S. 41 (1957) Cited 58,536 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"
Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence & Coordination Unit
507 U.S. 163 (1993) Cited 5,121 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that there is no heightened pleading requirement in § 1983 suits against municipalities
Warth v. Seldin
422 U.S. 490 (1975) Cited 11,886 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"
Hughes v. Rowe
449 U.S. 5 (1980) Cited 6,622 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that pleadings drafted by pro se litigants should be held to a lesser standard than those drafted by lawyers since "[a]n unrepresented litigant should not be punished for his failure to recognize subtle factual or legal deficiencies in his claims"
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 346,675 times 923 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 156,633 times 194 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 2671 - Definitions
28 U.S.C. § 2671 Cited 9,379 times 6 Legal Analyses
Defining "[e]mployee of the government" for purposes of the FTCA as "officers or employees of any federal agency "
Section 2675 - Disposition by federal agency as prerequisite; evidence
28 U.S.C. § 2675 Cited 7,091 times 1 Legal Analyses
Setting forth FTCA's administrative exhaustion requirement
Section 2679 - Exclusiveness of remedy
28 U.S.C. § 2679 Cited 5,343 times 5 Legal Analyses
Granting tort immunity to federal agency employees
Section Amendment XIV - Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection
U.S. Const. amend. XIV Cited 11,447 times 3 Legal Analyses
Containing both a Due Process Clause and an Equal Protection Clause
Section Amendment I - Religion and Expression
U.S. Const. amend. I Cited 7,111 times 3 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the "right to petition the Government for redress of grievances"
Section 1364 - Direct actions against insurers of members of diplomatic missions and their families
28 U.S.C. § 1364 Cited 63 times
Allowing direct suit against the insurers of certain diplomatic personnel

Miango et al v. Democratic Republic of Congo et al

67 Cited authorities

Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"

Holding that the plaintiff’s § 1983 claim failed where the plaintiff failed to establish that he was deprived of a substantive due process right secured by the Constitution

Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

Holding Title VII applies to selection for non-employee positions if consideration for that position can be regarded as one of "terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" of a covered job

Holding a Bivens claim does not lie against federal agencies because, if damages claims were permitted against federal agencies, "there would be no reason for aggrieved parties to bring damages actions against individual officers" and thus "the deterrent effects of the Bivens remedy would be lost"

Holding that executive branch officers had qualified immunity

Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

Holding that there is no heightened pleading requirement in § 1983 suits against municipalities

Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

Holding that pleadings drafted by pro se litigants should be held to a lesser standard than those drafted by lawyers since "[a]n unrepresented litigant should not be punished for his failure to recognize subtle factual or legal deficiencies in his claims"

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

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Defining "[e]mployee of the government" for purposes of the FTCA as "officers or employees of any federal agency "

Setting forth FTCA's administrative exhaustion requirement

Granting tort immunity to federal agency employees

Containing both a Due Process Clause and an Equal Protection Clause

Recognizing the "right to petition the Government for redress of grievances"

Allowing direct suit against the insurers of certain diplomatic personnel