Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Personal Injury Law Blogs -> Honolulu Personal Injury Lawyer
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Personal Injury Law
: Honolulu Personal Injury LawyerThe Conservative Judicial Activism Chronicles: Notice Pleading is No Longer the Law in Federal Court
By Wayne Parsons
Filing a lawsuit for personal injury, civil rights, employment disputes and all other cases has just become more complex in Federal Court. This article is for trial attorneys who might be caught by surprise by a motion to dismiss in the very near future.
The U.S. Supreme Court has abandoned notice pleading and created a new standard for screening cases filed called the "plausibility" standard.
In Bell Atlantic vs. Twombly and Ashcroft vs. Iqbal the Roberts' Court with the conservatives banding together over-ruled the landmark 1957 decision in Connelly vs. Gibson that had created what we have long known and used _ notice pleading _ in Federal Court. Although Bell Atlantic was an anti-trust case and Iqbal was a Homeland Security case the rulings will apply to all federal court cases. In the growing trend of conservative Justices to re-write American law _ conservative judicial activism _ these two decisions abolish the standard of notice pleading. in Federal Courts. The new standard of review for motions to dismiss on the pleadings is whether there is a 'plausible' way that the Plaintiff could prevail. No definition is given of what is, or is not, plausible. One thing for sure. The Complaints filed will be voluminous and have many exhibits so as not to fail the plausibility test. And Federal District judges will face difficult and voluminous motions in most cases. We see once again the problems that arise when the Justices have no practical experience in court trying cases. Plausibility will be a nightmare and explode litigation costs.
The old standard of assuming the facts stated in the complaint are true is no longer the standard. You can bet that you will face motions to dismiss on any case filed in Federal Court.
I am very interested in any case where such a motion is filed. The American Association of Justice (AAJ) is developing materials that will help in responding to these motions. Sen. Specter has a bill already on file to return to the Connelly standard. These two Supreme Court decisions can be changed by passing a new Rule or by legislative action.
Stay tuned for more on this siubject and please share your experiences with the Injury Board.
Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne ParsonsFull post as published by Honolulu Personal Injury Lawyer on July 28, 2009 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Taylor Bean Faces Federal WARN Class Action
Taylor Bean Federal Employment Class Action Filed
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.
Missouri Attorney General's Office
$26,000 settlement reached in disability discrimination lawsuit, pending court approval.

Findlaw Commentator: McCain proves judicial activism is a non-issue
Jordan Lorence: What is Judicial Activism
The Judicial Activism of the Roberts Court








