Legal Opinion
Beauregard v. Wingard
District Court, S.D. California
Decided June 1, 1964No. Civ. 2785PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEINBERGER, District Judge.
Plaintiff’s original complaint herein was attacked by defendants on several grounds. The Court first considered and granted a motion to make more definite and certain. A similar motion was directed to the first amended complaint. In granting the second motion we said, in our memorandum to counsel dated September 17, 1963:
“We are here confronted with grave constitutional questions. * * In justice to the parties and to the Court, the complaint should be one which clearly states the allegations which plaintiff means it should state, and these allegations should be…
2Cases cited106 opinions
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Dombrowski v. PfisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- William Whirl v. C. v. (Buster) Kern and Fidelity and Deposit Company of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Donald W. Keniston v. Richard L. Roberts, Bendt A. Pedersen, Vince Hecox, the County of San Bernardino, and Southern California Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Katie Ruth Anderson v. J. J. Nosser, James Bradley v. J. J. NosserCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Michael Arthur Donovan v. Earl Reinbold and Harley Askew, Michael Arthur Donovan v. Earl Reinbold and Harley AskewCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.