Legal Opinion
Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 31, 2017No. Civil Action No. 2017-0034PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, United States District Judge
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s [7] Motion to Dismiss, brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The following factual narrative is gleaned from the allegations of the complaint, which are taken as true solely for purposes of the pending motion: Plaintiff separated from Defendant Judicial Watch in Sbptem-ber 2003. Compl. ¶ 9. As part of the separation, the parties executed a severance agreement, which included a non-disparagement clause. Id. Before his separation from Judicial Watch,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Ward v. D.C. Department of Youth Rehabilitation ServicesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Moss v. StockardDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Messina, Karyn v. Krakower, DanielCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2018