Legal Opinion
Windsor v. a Federal Executive Agency
District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Decided March 13, 1984No. Civ. A. 3-83-0509PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
NEESE, Senior District Judge.
The rules governing pleading in the federal courts require a complaint to contain “ * * * a short and plain statement of the claim * * * ” and the averments therein must be “ * * * simple, concise, and direct.” Rule 8(a)(2), (e)(1), F.R.Civ.P.; see United States v. School Dist. of Ferndale, 577 F.2d 1339, 1345 (6th Cir.1978). This is the only permissible pleading authorized for filing in a federal district court. Harrell v. Directors of Bur. of Narcotics, Etc., 70 F.R.D. 444, 446[2] (D.C.Tenn.1975). The complaint herein is deficient.
Mr.…
2Cases cited67 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Davis v. PassmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Carlson v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Bradley v. McLeodCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1998
- Quinn v. StoneCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Shell v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
- Brennan v. National Telephone Directory Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
- Mittleman v. United States TreasuryDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1991
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.