Legal Opinion
Payne v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 29, 2011No. Civil Action 10-0679 (PLF)PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss and plaintiffs motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. The Court heard oral argument on these two motions on March 25, 2011, and took them under advisement. Upon review of the parties’ papers, the oral arguments presented by counsel, the relevant legal authorities, and the entire record in this case, the Court will grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motion to dismiss and will deny plaintiffs motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. 1
I. BACKGROUND
The…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Charles Kowal v. MCI Communications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1994
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Clayton v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- McGinnis v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Campbell v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Dickerson v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Payne v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.