Misischia v. St. John's Mercy Health Systems

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 plaintiff can be denied leave to amend his complaint when he does not file a motion or explain what he would change
• holding that the district court does not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend when plaintiff raises the issue “with a one-line request in his brief opposing defendants’ motion to dismiss”
• holding district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied leave to amend a complaint requested through a brief in opposition to a motion to dismiss
• defining an appeal as frivolous “when the result is obvious or when the appellant’s argument is wholly without merit”
• “The doctrine of res judicata would become meaningless if a party could relitigate the same issue . . . by merely positing a few additional facts that occurred after the initial suit.” (citation omitted)
• three “extortionate” 7 letters from 2001 and 2002 were so unrelated to events of 1993 and 1994 as to add nothing to the 8 showing that the earlier acts reflected “a threat of continued racketeering activity,” the prerequisite of a 9 RICO claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).