Ellen S. v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that courts may disregard allegations that are “internally inconsistent” or that “run counter to facts of which the court can take judicial notice.”
• noting that there “are a few exceptions to” the rule requiring courts to accept a complaint’s allegations as true, “such as where the facts alleged are internally inconsistent or where they run counter to facts of which the court can take judicial notice”
• noting that there “are a few exceptions to” the rule requiring courts to accept a complaint’s allegations as true, “such as where the facts alleged are internally inconsistent or where they run counter to facts of which the court can take judicial notice”
• court stated, in dicta, that licensing board’s broad inquiry into applicants’ mental health would violate Title II

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).