Louisville Trust Co. v. Bayer Steam Soot Blower Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that court’s judgment on the pleadings ruling was a final judgment for res judicata purposes
• dismissing Fourteenth Amendment claim for placement in Special Management Unit where no significant time alleged under procedural and substantive Due Process considerations
• dismissing §1983 and §1985 conspiracy claims where complaint only alleged conclusory agreement
• directing the Clerk to reissue summons for defendants and ordering defense counsel to provide “last known residential address” for defendants to the USMS because “Plaintiff is not in a position to know a present address at which to serve these Defendants”
• “At the motion to dismiss stage, intent, in some circumstances, can be inferred from a chronology of events which may support an inference of retaliation.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• “Although the exact claims advanced by [plaintiff] are not always easy to divine, the Court construes the pro se Complaint liberally in defining those claims raised by plaintiff.” (citing Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).