USE LAW SCHOOL NOTES AND OUTLINE MAKER PROGRAM TO INSTANTLY CREATE :
CASE LISTS
*To keep a running checklist of what's been covered in class as you go thru the course :
Case
Name : Matthews, Sec. of Health, Education and Welfare v. Eldridge
Case
Name : Fuentes v. Shevin
Case
Name : Marek v. Chesney
Case
Name : Bower v. Weisman
Case
Name : Leatherman v. Tarrant
County Narcotics
Intelligence and Coordination Unit
Case
Name : Conley v. Gibson-Black RR Workers
Case
Name : DM II, Ltd. V. Hospital Corp. of America
Case
Name : Doe v. United Services Life Insurance Co.
Case
Name : Kedra v. City of Philadelphia
Case
Name : Banque Indosuez v. Trifinery
RULE OUTLINES
*Crucial for success on issue-spotting exams :
Rule :
An evidentiary hearing is not required prior to the termination of Social
Security disability benefit payments.
Rule :
The P has a significant property interest in the stove and radio and is
extended protection under the 14th Amendment.
Rule :
Chesny is not eligible to recover costs accrued after original offer.
Rule :
12(e) motion will only surivive if complaint is clearly ambiguous
Rule :
heightened pleading standard not required when non-municipal action
Rule :
12b(6) motion will failure unless complaint will not succeed under any legal
theory !
Rule :
Partners in a corporation can be considered separate real parties of interest
Rule :
Exceptions may be made for naming party of interest
Rule :
When claims occur out of same transaction or occurence can join parties.
Rule :
-compulsory issueà if you don’t use the, you lose them you can’t bring them
later
FACT LISTS
*Also great for matching up case facts with novel facts on issue-spotting exams :
Facts :
Eldridge was awarded disability benefits in June 1968 under the Social Security
Act. In March 1972 he received a
questionnaire from the state about his medical condition. Eldridge filled it out claiming his condition
had not improved and included info from physicians. The state got reports from his physician and
psychiatrist. The state sent him a
letter stating a tentative determination was made that his disability ended in
May 1972. The letter stated reasons for
proposed termination and advised him he could submit additional info to the
state within a reasonable time. He
disputed the termination by letter but the final termination of his benefits
was in May 1972. He challenged the
constitutionality of the administrative procedures.
Facts :
P bought stove on a monthly payment plan, then buys a radio in same way. P made payments on time, but withheld payment
because of a problem with the stove.
Firestone repossessed the items by writ of replevin and the Sheriff
seized the items. Sheriff as part of the
State triggers involvement of 14th Amendment.
The P was not afforded any procedure.
Facts :
*3 officers, in response to a domestic disturbance call, shot and killed the
son of respondent
Facts :
The parties entered a contract whereby the husband was to provide the wife with
numerous items including the townhouse at dispute. Three years passed between
the contract signing and the break of relationship. The husband claimed that the forum did not
have jurisdiction over him. The court disagreed. The court did agree with the
husband that the wife's complaint was deficient in that it failed to state
which defendant which claim was made against, 12(e). The court dismissed the
wife's claim for misrepresentation, fraud, and deceit as she failed to give
sufficient facts and these claims mandated a higher standard of pleading, 9(b).
The wife's failure to plead a substantial and unreasonable interference with
the land is fatal to her claim for private nuisance.
Facts :
Plaintiffs were stopped by police and notified their home was being searched
and in the process their 2 dogs were killed.
Plaintiffs returned home to find both dogs shot and dead. Officers found nothing relevant to their
investigation. Police lounged on
Plaintiffs front lawn drinking and smoking for over an hour. In separate incident officers entered home of
64 year old plaintiff without identifying.
Plaintiff was mourning death of his wife. Officers proceeded to beat the Plaintiff
without provocation. Officers forced
family on the floor and insulted them but found nothing relevant to investigation. Plaintiffs both complain the officers were
not sufficiently trained.
Facts :
45 black railroad workers were fired and replaced with white workers and the Union did not give them the same protection it gave the
white workers. The blacks alleged the
discrimination was a violation of the Railway Labor Act to fair representation
from their agent. The black workers lost their seniority. They asked for a declaratory judgment,
injunction and damages. The railway
moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and the D. Ct. granted it because the National
Railroad Adjustment Board had exclusive jurisdiction. Ct. of Appeals affirmed.
Facts :
Action for equitable relief for breach of fiduciary duties. Plaintiff contends they and the defendants
are partners in ownership and defendants breached duties by opening a competing
hospital. Defense claims each entity
must bring the action, or the whole entity must bring it. This action cannot be
brought because the defendants can always veto it.
Facts :
Plaintiff is a law clerk and applies for health benefits. His blood showed levels indicating alcohol
abuse. Doe offered to retake test but
USLIC declined. USLIC added $105 to his
premium. Doe got a private blood test and
it was normal. Doe alleged
discrimination on sexual orientation.
USLIC alleged that by Doe being anonymous it was not allowing the
company to defend itself.
Facts :
Plaintiff sues on behalf of her children who are minors. On Dec. 22 plaintiff’s husband and 2 of her
children were arrested at gun point without probable cause, separated and
questioned for several hours, and not informed of their constitutional rights
and refused right to counsel. They were
handcuffed and beaten, sustaining serious injuries. At the same time Elizabeth Rozanski was
detained and questioned, not advised of her rights. Defendants searched her room without
warrant. Dolores went to Roadhouse
voluntarily and was coerced into signing search request. On Dec. 29 police went to house and said they
had papers for R. Rozanski to appear in court.
Rozanski and children were assaulted.
Rozanski, Kenneth and Joseph were charged on several counts and later
acquitted. Defendants do not want to be
joined together (20) b/c as individuals they will not be treated fairly, but
prejudiced. Some officers did more
egregious things than others. The Plaintiff’s
want them all joined b/c to sue a public officer is very difficult, they want
to show the systemic nature of the harassment
Facts :
Defendants do not dispute they are liable. D argues they can’t enforce the
waiver b/c they would be precluded from bringing a claim in the future. In NY all counterclaims are permissive so
enforcing the waiver does not harm the D.
The court says if they enforce the waiver it ruins future claims for the
D. If they say it is permissive then it
will be like it is in NYS and it will not harm the D.
HEADINGS LISTS
*Also great for making a fact-pattern checklist of topics for tough issue-spotting exams :
Heading : Right to be Heard: Elements and
History of Due Process
Heading : Remedies and Stakes
Heading : Attorneys’ Fees
Heading : Pleadings
Heading : Pleadings
Heading : Heightened Pleading Standards
Heading : Real Party of Interest
Heading : Naming party of interest
Heading : Joinder of Parties and Claims
Heading : Counterclaims
OR ANY KIND OF OUTLINE YOU LIKE, ALL EFFORTLESSLY AND EXACTLY THE WAY YOU WANT IT WITH JUST A FEW CLICKS OF YOUR MOUSE !