Pleadings

Question 1

1) Mullane v. Central Hanover bank

Answer 1

1) Facts
i) Bank wants to notify a bunch of benefactors of a small trust notice of pending issue, and posts it in the newspaper. Court says that notice is insufficient.
2) Holding
i) Mullane Test for procedural Due process
a. “Court held that the amount of effort required in giving notice is proportional to the interest at stake.”

Question 2

1) Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Answer 2

1. Facts
   i) Detainee accused of terrorist activity, is charged and sentenced, wants to sue the head of CIA and FBI with some ridiculous conspiracy claim.
   2. Holding
   i) a complaint will only survive a motion to dismiss if it alleges nonconclusory facts that, taken as true, state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.

Question 3

2) Stradford v. Zurich

Answer 3

1. Facts
   i) Dentist doesn’t renew his insurance policy, a month later he renews it and a few days later makes a flood claim. It is found in discovery that it actually happened a little while before. Counterclaim maid for fraud 2. Holding
   In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Question 4

3) Bell v. Novick

Answer 4

1. Facts
   i) Car accident, P alleges NEG but the D tries to 12b6 by saying she has not claimed enough
   
   2. Holding
      i) A claim upon which relief may be granted is a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and
      ii) A party is not entitled to a more definite statement unless the facts are necessary for the party to form his response to the pleading.
      b. The Structure

Question 5

1) Zielinkski v. Philadelphia Piers

Answer 5

1. Facts
   i) Forklift accident on the pier the company had some weird merger/buy out and the P sued the wrong company. However the company that got sued tried to stop it after they found out they were the wrong company.
   
   2. Holding
      i) A defendant who knowingly makes inaccurate statements may be estopped from denying those statements at trial. A general denial is ineffective if some of the claims denied are true and not at issue.

Question 6

1) Beeck v. Aquaslide ‘n’ dive corp.

Answer 6

1. Holding
   While the P showed possible prejudice if the amendment was granted, the court reasoned that that the amendment would merely allow the D to contest a factual dispute at trial and that it would be prejudicial to the D to deny them such. Thus leave granted to the D to amend their answer, was without prejudice and therefor required by justice.

Question 7

2) Moore v. Baker

Answer 7

1. Holding
   i) “The alleged acts of NEG occurred at different times and involved separate and distinct conduct.”
   A. The original claim asserts that Baker did not adequately inform Moore of alternative treatment options prior to the surgery, but the amended complaint alleged negligence in the conduct of the surgery itself, which involved actions that occurred at different times and involved distinct conduct from the acts alleged in the original complaint. The amendment does not relate back to the original complaint

Question 8

3) Bonerb v. Richard J. Caron Foundation

Answer 8

1. Holding
   i) The allegations in the original and amended complaints derive from the same nucleus of operative facts involving the injury suffered by the Plaintiff.
   the claims in both the original and amended complaints derive from the same nucleus of operative facts, namely Bonerb’s injuries allegedly sustained when he fell on the basketball court. Thus, the amendment only changes the legal theory on which relief is sought. The amended complaint relates back to the original complaint and leave to amend is granted.