Craig S. Strauss v. City of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation, and Chicago Police Officer John Doe

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “bare legal conclusions” are insufficient to survive a 12(b)(6) motion where a plaintiff failed to include factual allegations in support of the elements of a claim
• holding that “bare legal conclusions” are insufficient to survive a 12(b)(6) motion where a plaintiff failed to include factual allegations in support of the elements of a claim
• holding that “bare legal conclusions” are insufficient to survive a 12(b)(6) motion where a plaintiff failed to include factual allegations in support of the elements of a claim
• concluding that dismissal was proper where plaintiff did not name “John Doe” defendant and noting that a plaintiff has the responsibility of taking the steps necessary to identify the officer responsible for his injuries
• holding that a plaintiff offering statistical evidence for a Monell claim needs to identify “what it was that made those prior 23 [unlawful incidents] illegal and to show that a similar illegality was involved in his case.’”
• explaining that a plaintiff must allege “a pattern of conduct or a series of acts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).