Charles Russell Twist v. Edwin Meese, Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “advance notice, an on-the-record hearing, and an opportunity to submit a written answer to the charges against him” would have satisfied due process
• holding that a district court does not abuse its discretion in accepting as true the movant’s properly supported statement of material facts not in dispute where the opposing party failed to submit a counterstatement
• cautioning that dismissal of a potentially meritorious claim for failure to 13 In Winston & Strawn, the D.C. Circuit Court clarified that despite the language of Local Civil Rule 7(b
• “[A trial] court judge should not be obliged to sift through hundreds of pages of depositions, affidavits, and interrogatories in order to make his own analysis and determination of what may, or may not, be a genuine issue of material disputed fact.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).