Legal Opinion
Abrams v. Vilsack
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 24, 2009No. Civil Action 08-1760 (PLF)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Mot.”); the pro se plaintiffs opposition thereto (“Opp.”); and the defendant’s reply (“Reply”). The Court will grant the defendant’s motion and dismiss this case.
I. BACKGROUND
A. The Pigford Litigation
On October 9, 1998, this Court certified a class of African American farmers who alleged that the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) willfully…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Charles Kowal v. MCI Communications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1994
- Desert Palace, Inc. v. CostaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Pigford v. GlickmanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pigford v. VenemanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Parker v. United States Department of AgricultureDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2019
- Pigford v. VenemanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Pigford v. VenemanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2019