Rouse v. Fader
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND LATASHA ROUSE, et al., : Plaintiffs, = v. * Civ. No. JKB-22-0129 MATTHEW FADER, et al., * Defendants. * □□ x * te te x xe x * * * * MEMORANDUM Now before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (“Motion for Leave to Amend”), (ECF No. 72), and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 73). The motions are fully briefed, and no hearing is required. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2023). For the reasons below, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted and Plaintiffs’ Motion for…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.