Legal Opinion

Auster Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Matilda Gray Stream

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided July 1, 1985No. 84-4486PublishedCited by 86 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JERRE S. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge:

The district court dismissed the complaint of appellant Auster Oil & Gas Company as to appellees Matilda Gray Stream and M.G.S. of Lake Charles, Inc., on the ground that Auster had failed to state a claim against them under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court also denied Auster’s motion to amend its pleading to allege facts it discovered after the dismissal. We hold that Auster’s original complaint stated a section 1983 claim and that the district court should have allowed the amendment. We accordingly vacate the judgment and remand the ease for further proceedings.

I.…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

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

3Cited by86 opinions

  1. Dino Cinel v. Harry F. Connick, Individually and as District Attorney for the Parish of Orleans, State of LouisianaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
  2. Richard McGary v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  3. Santiago, etc. v. Canon, U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
  4. Wimm v. Jack Eckerd Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
  5. John E. Washington v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990

81 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