John Paul v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was improper for district court to consider “conclusory and hearsay” statements in an attorney affidavit where the statements were not based upon personal knowledge
• holding that the district court improperly considered an attorney’s affidavit where the affidavit “contain[ed] no information to indicate a basis in personal knowledge for the affiant’s conclusory statement”
• holding that courts may consider documents outside the complaint on a Rule 12(b)(1) motion
• stating that “evidentiary matter may be presented by affidavit or otherwise” under a Rule 12(b)(1) motion
• stating that “evidentiary matter may be presented by affidavit or otherwise” under a Rule 12(b)(1) motion
• stating that “evidentiary matter may be pre- sented by affidavit or otherwise” under a Rule 12(b)(1) motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).