Legal Opinion
Doe v. Roe
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided January 7, 1991No. 90 C 5717PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HART, District Judge.
Presently pending is defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On such a motion, all the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint are assumed to be true and all reasonable inferences from the facts alleged are drawn in favor of plaintiff. Gomez v. Illinois State Board of Education, 811 F.2d 1030, 1039 (7th Cir.1987). The motion will be granted only if defendant can demonstrate that the facts alleged cannot support a claim. See id. at 1039-40.
Plaintiff Jane Doe was a client of defendant John Roe, an attorney with and shareholder of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McNally v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Carpenter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Jorge Gomez v. Illinois State Board of Education and Ted Sanders, in His Official Capacity as Illinois State Superintendent of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- R. Richard Bastian, III v. Petren Resources CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
- Harry E. Fleischhauer v. C. Elvin Feltner, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Diaz v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Jane Doe v. John Roe, and Roe and Roe, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Lemelson v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1994
- Diaz v. ParksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Diaz v. ParksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005