Griffin v. Abn Amro Mortg. Grp., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that motions under Rule 12(b) and (c) “[do not] permit piecemeal dismissals of parts of claims”
• holding that the standard of review for a Rule 12(c) motion is the same as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6)
• suggesting that \[s]ummary judgment is different\ from Rules 12(b)(6) and 12(c) in part because Rule 56(a) contemplates summary judgment on part of a claim or defense
• suggesting that “[s]ummary judgment is different” from Rules 12(b)(6) and 12(c) in part because Rule 56(a) contemplates summary judgment on part of a claim or defense
• noting that “as long as one purpose of the ordinance is to combat harmful secondary effects, the ordinance is regarded as content neutral (despite the legal fiction
• finding that “[a]s a procedural matter . . . the [defendant’s] motion for judgment on the pleadings on parts of the First Amendment claim may have been improper”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).