Joseph B. X. Smith v. Dr. Stanley Blackledge, Warden, Central Prison

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a document construed as an opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss which contained new claims alleged by a pro se plaintiff should have been considered an amendment to the complaint regardless of whether the court granted leave to amend
• noting that “claims . . . set out in a 36-page, handwritten document . . . denominated as one to ‘Further Particularize’ the complaint [and] regarded by the District Judge as merely a response to defendants’ motion to dismiss . . . should have been 2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d
• motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading for purposes of Rule 15(a)
• motion to dismiss not a responsive pleading for purposes of Rule 15(a)
• motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading under Rule 15(a)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).