Legal Opinion
Stith v. Chadbourne & Parke, LLP.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 19, 2001No. 99-3265PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion to amend his complaint and defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. In his motion to amend, plaintiff seeks to add five counts to the complaint and to add an additional defendant. Defendant opposes plaintiffs motion to amend and has moved for judgment on the pleadings with respect to both counts of the original complaint. Upon consideration of the arguments presented by the parties, the Court grants plaintiffs motion to amend in part and denies it in part and denies defendant’s motion for…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Furnco Construction Corp. v. WatersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- O'CONNOR v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Jung v. Ass'n of American Medical CollegesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
- Bowie v. GonzalesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
- Gray v. Universal Service Administrative Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- ['Hill v. Gray']District Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Dickerson v. Dist. of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.