Legal Opinion

Nix v. Hoke

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided August 17, 1999No. Civ.A. 98-3039(HHK)PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

KENNEDY, District Judge.

Plaintiff, John H. Nix, has brought this action alleging that former United States Representative Martin Hoke and Nix’s former neighbor, Bernice Ferencz 1 , engaged in a conspiracy to interfere with proceedings in a federal trial in Ohio. Nix has brought RICO and tort claims against both defendants and Bivens claims against Hoke. Before the court are defendants’ motion to strike the most recent amended complaint, Rep. Hoke’s motion to dismiss the original complaint for failure to state a claim, Ferencz’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Naartex Consulting Corporation, Russell Huff v. James G. Watt, Secretary of InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ellipso, Inc. v. MannDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  2. Hisler v. Gallaudet UniversityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
  3. Flynn v. R.D. Masonry, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2010
  4. Nix v. HokeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2001
  5. Daniel Lipsky v. Martin J. Jackley, in his individual capacity as the Attorney General of the State of South Dakota; Thomas Denny Sanford, Sanford Health, a non-profit private corporation; First Premier Bank, a for-profit private corporation; Federal Judge Lawrence Piersol, in individual capacity; Federal Judge Camilla Theeler, in individual capacity; Federal Judge Eric Schulte, in individual capacity; and John and Jane Doe 1-12, currently unknown possible co-defendants.District Court, D. South Dakota · 2026

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API