Citing references
Opinions citing Clay v. Doctor William R. Martin & the United States Surgeon Gen. & the United States, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir. 1975)
32 citing cases
-
600 F.3d 516 Fifth CircuitMarch 16, 2010
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975) (“[T]he presence of ‘improper parties’ [is] an invalid basis for dismissal of [a] complaint. Misjoinder ... does not justify such an extreme sanction.”); Sabolsky v.
-
415 F. Supp. 421 S.D. New YorkMay 17, 1976
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 112 (2d Cir. 1975); Byram River v. Village of Port Chester, New York, 394 F.Supp. 618, 628-29 (S.D.N.Y.1975); Owens v. Housing Authority of City of Stamford, 394 F.Supp. 1267, 1270 (D.Conn.1975).
-
782 A.2d 807 Court of Appeals of MarylandAugust 16, 2001
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (1975); Bailey, Dingee, Neuser & Munney v. Lally, 481 F.Supp. 203 (1979); Valenti v.
-
21 B.R. 323 Bankr. S.D. New YorkJune 29, 1982
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir. 1975); Glazer Steel Corp. v. Yawata Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., D.C., 56 F.R.D. 75 (S.D.N.Y.1972), 3 Moore’s Federal Practice, ¶ 15.08[4] (2d ed.).
-
526 F. App'x 94 Second CircuitMay 3, 2013 Unpublished
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975), a party must show “good cause” to amend his or her complaint if the motion is filed after the deadline imposed by the district court in its scheduling order, Parker v.
-
108 F.R.D. 14 S.D. New YorkJuly 9, 1985
-
826 F.2d 507 Seventh CircuitJuly 22, 1987
Winterhalder, 724 *509 F.2d 109 (10th Cir.1983).
-
739 F.3d 99 Second CircuitJanuary 7, 2014
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975) (“[T]he presence of ‘improper parties’ [is] ... an invalid basis for dismissal of [a] complaint. Misjoinder ... does not justify such an extreme sanction.”); Sabolsky v.
-
152 F.R.D. 18 S.D. New YorkDecember 6, 1993
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975); New York v. Cedar Park Concrete Corp., 741 F.Supp. 494, 496 (S.D.N.Y.1990).
-
500 F. Supp. 904 D. ConnecticutNovember 18, 1980
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir. 1975); Middle Atlantic Utilities Co. v. S. M. W. Development Corp., 392 F.2d 380, 384-86 (2d Cir. 1968); Holman v.
-
206 F.R.D. 11 D.D.C.January 10, 2002
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113-114 (2d Cir.1975); Price v. Kelly, 847 F.Supp. 163 , 164 n. 1 (D.D.C.1994) (stating that the court would grant the plaintiff leave to allege additional facts).
-
655 F. Supp. 346 S.D. New YorkMarch 7, 1987
-
535 F. Supp. 1020 S.D. New YorkApril 5, 1982
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir. 1975); Wright & Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure: Civil §§ 1484, 1488 (1971). Such leave “shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Rule 15(a), F.R.Civ.P.
-
392 F. Supp. 1335 S.D. New YorkMarch 24, 1975
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2 Cir. 1975) ; Patterson v. MacDougall, 506 F.2d 1, 2-3 (5 Cir. 1975). After reading Mr.
-
460 F. Supp. 1102 D. WyomingNovember 17, 1978
Devitt, 509 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1975); Weiner v. Shearson, Hammill & Co., Inc., 521 F.2d 817 (9th Cir. 1975); Steele v. Bunten, unpublished 77-2033 (10th Cir. 1978).
-
2016 UT 32, 379 P.3d 1247 Utah Supreme CourtJuly 20, 2016
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 1183 (2d Cir.1975) (concluding that a complaint could not be dismissed based only on the presence of "improper parties"); Sa-boisky v.
-
621 F. Supp. 1170 S.D. New YorkNovember 19, 1985
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 112 (2d Cir.1975); Poloron Products, Inc. v. Lybrand Ross Bros. & Montgomery, 72 F.R.D. 556, 558 (S.D.N.Y.1976). 3 . Section 487 provides, in relevant part; An attorney or counselor who: 1.
-
534 F. Supp. 489 N.D. New YorkMarch 10, 1982
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir. 1975). See also Wright & Miller, supra. The Court is required to accept the plaintiffs’ factual allegations as true. Scheuer v. Rhodes, supra, 416 U.S. at 236 , 94 S.Ct. at 1686 ; Conley v.
-
842 F. Supp. 528 N.D. GeorgiaDecember 14, 1993
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975); 2A James Wm. Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 8.08 (2d ed. 1993), and that venue in the Northern District of Georgia is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1355 (a) and (b)(1)(A). Plaintiffs Response [35], p. 5.
-
753 F. Supp. 1169 S.D. New YorkDecember 18, 1990
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir.1975). Consequently, the fact that plaintiff alleges in his civil rights claim that defendant’s actions were unlawful does not prevent him from alleging otherwise in his prima facie tort claim.
-
116 B.R. 721 Bankr. C.D. CaliforniaJuly 2, 1990
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir.1975). 11 .No interested party has made any claim that it would be unfairly hurt in any substantive way by allowing the petition to continue after the jurisdictional defect is cured by dropping Mov-ants.
-
670 F. Supp. 96 S.D. New YorkJuly 22, 1987
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 112 (2d Cir.1975); Bishop v. Stoneman, 508 F.2d 1224, 1225 (2d Cir.1974); Williams v. Vincent, 508 F.2d 541, 543 (2d Cir.1974).
-
728 F. Supp. 990 S.D. New YorkJanuary 4, 1990
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir.1975). A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of a claim that would entitle him to relief. See Dahlberg v.
-
198 F. Supp. 2d 587 S.D. New YorkApril 30, 2002
Martin, 509 F.2d 109, 113 (2d Cir. 1975) (leave should be denied where it shall cause “undue delay or prejudice to the opposing party”); 11.
-
570 F. Supp. 1465 N.D. New YorkSeptember 23, 1983
Martin, 509 F.2d 109 (2d Cir.1975). Accordingly, defendant’s motion pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. 1 .