David Wilson v. Gerald Birnberg

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Plaintiff, who sought to run in the Democratic primary for county commissioner and was excluded from the ballot due to his failure to include his residential address in his application, “lack[ed] an interest protected by procedural due process”
• explaining that when “claims fail on the merits, there can be no damages.”
• disregarding a plaintiff’s substantive due process claims because they were “rooted in procedural due process, the Equal Protection Clause, and the First Amendment”
• “A court’s analysis generally should focus exclusively on what appears in the complaint and its proper attachments.”
• “[Plaintiff] alleged intentional discrimination, not unintended irregularities .... The complaint claimed enough. Further proceedings are needed.”
• “[W]e continue to hold that public office does not constitute property within the meaning of the Due Process Clause.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).