Legal Opinion

Hinton v. Rudasill

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided June 12, 2009No. Civil Action No. 2008-1073Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA KENNETH A. HINTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1073 (RWR) ) JAMES A. RUDASILL, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Kenneth A. Hinton, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis at the time,1 filed this pro se complaint based on diversity jurisdiction, asserting legal malpractice and other common law claims against his former defense counsel James A. Rudasill. Rudasill has moved to dismiss the complaint. Because Hinton’s claims are either barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel or do not state a…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Polk County v. DodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980

17 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