Arthur Sanders, Jr. v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• granting intervention where, “[i]n practical terms, the [plaintiff] wanted 18 the court to order the [government] to change [the intervenor’s] permits[.]”
• affirming dismissal of a complaint where the district court 18 was “literally guessing as to what facts support the legal claims being asserted against certain 19 defendants”
• rejecting objection to incorporation by reference of 18 documents where objection did not address, or cast doubt, as to whether the copies 19 were accurate reproductions of the original documents
• affirming dismissal of complaint where “one cannot 18 determine from the complaint who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory, with 19 enough detail to guide discovery”
• explaining the good-cause and compelling-reason 18 standards for sealing judicial records and documents
• prosecutor argued that [Hamilton] would be ‘conniving and devising ways to manipulate the system and get out[’]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).