Legal Opinion
Carol A. Rannels, Lynn L. Rannels v. S. E. Nichols, Inc
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided January 18, 1979No. 78-1637PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
ALDISERT, Circuit Judge.
In 1957 the Supreme Court instructed that “the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a claimant to set out in detail the facts upon which he bases his claim.” 1 The district court here dismissed a diversity action on the grounds that the complaint did not contain proper “factual allegations” to set forth a claim upon which relief could be granted under the applicable Pennsylvania law of malicious prosecution and defamation. We must decide whether the complaint as drafted met the minimum requirements of Rule 8(a), Federal Rules of Civil…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Continental Collieries, Inc. v. ShoberCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- Nelson v. KeeferCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Altman v. Standard Refrig. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States ex rel. Walker v. Fayette CountyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Agriss v. Roadway Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation v. Walter Jacobson and Cbs, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Gordon v. Lancaster Osteopathic Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Weaver v. WilcoxCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.