Eighth Circuit· 4/15/2010

Zutz v. Nelson

Citations

601 F.3d 842
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7731
2010 WL 1489350

How courts have described this case

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

holding that reputational damage and embarrassment are insufficient to chill a person of ordinary firmness from engaging in protected activity
explaining that to state a § 1983 claira, “a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to show (1) that the defendant(s
stating that for purposes of a § 1983 claim, “a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to show that the defendant(s) acted under color of state law”
stating that for purposes of a § 1983 claim, “a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to show that the defendant(s) acted under color of state law”
noting that an amendment is considered futile when it “could not withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
noting that an amendment is considered futile when it “could not withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bye, Beam, Colloton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

87 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Zutz v. Nelson

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.