TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Burns v. Spiller

Burns v. Spiller, 161 F.2d 377 (D.C. Cir. 1947)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 24, 1947
Docket
No. 9360
Citations
161 F.2d 37782 U.S. App. D.C. 911947 U.S. App. LEXIS 2777

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, requires a complaint to contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief * * The District Court rightly dismissed appellant’s complaint, since it contained neither a short and plain statement nor any statement which showed that he was entitled to relief. The complaint undertakes to describe several episodes. Though it characterizes appellees’ alleged conduct as wrongful, unlawful, and malicious, it does not sufficiently disclose the conduct to enable a court to judge whether or not it was tortious.

The complaint shows that appellant and appellees were army officers. It may be that an official privilege covers the whole case, but we have no occasion to decide that broad question.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1951: 11957: 11961: 11999: 12002: 119512026peak 1951 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Riley v. Titus190 F.2d 653 (D.C. Cir. 1951)
  2. Chung Wing Ping v. Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States294 F.2d 735 (D.C. Cir. 1961)
  3. Slaff v. Slaff151 F. Supp. 124 (S.D.N.Y. 1957)
  4. Guidry v. United States Tobacco Co.188 F.3d 619 (5th Cir. 1999)
  5. Crompton Corp. v. Clariant Corp.221 F. Supp. 2d 683 (M.D. La. 2002)

Most recent

  1. Crompton Corp. v. Clariant Corp.221 F. Supp. 2d 683 (M.D. La. 2002)
  2. Guidry v. United States Tobacco Co.188 F.3d 619 (5th Cir. 1999)
  3. Chung Wing Ping v. Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States294 F.2d 735 (D.C. Cir. 1961)
  4. Slaff v. Slaff151 F. Supp. 124 (S.D.N.Y. 1957)
  5. Riley v. Titus190 F.2d 653 (D.C. Cir. 1951)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list