Mary MORLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CIBA-GEIGY CORP., Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• denying habeas relief because the petitioner’s “conclusory 22 allegations did not meet the specificity requirement”
• deeming demand for compensatory and punitive damages for alleged ADEA violations in supplemental complaint frivolous for Rule 11 purposes as barred by law of the case given prior ruling disallowing such damages
• stating the standard for imposing Rule 11 sanctions based on frivolous legal arguments
• “[A] pro se litigant is entitled to notice of the complaint’s deficiencies 25 and an opportunity to amend prior to dismissal of action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).