Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and
Coordination Unit case brief summary
507 U.S. 163 (1993)
DISCUSSION
The Court reversed a judgment affirming the dismissal of petitioners' complaints for failure to comply with heightened pleading requirements since the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure did not permit application of a heightened pleading standard in cases alleging municipal liability for constitutional injury.
Recommended Supplements for Civil Procedure
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sKw7ri7d2DnEFWdRSi24_3TfNl6z6H18KVRw78Fetcb5YoyKxBf3mqG1Tt2l1gUy4O2_p6X1gbFPPa_erk0ZPljjNpA5rlYGhlnvPsg3r8heZ8DdGP7AVQn0gkbJA-TsjtluOPkRzsHs-sTsK-eVpU6ny4Za2ensm1bHuEuwrUzqNmpq1CnqwFP432FTffp8mkzslivYecz2GPjzyN4m4V2aIl8XcAB4ehBaZ_l-4O_3pXRLmItVLMUAoejeeReaXdvQLFAuF5N2g=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tUKQig2IMBfY1HDoxYHwOKaLuHXFIWgY7XmCuE6JZsj-IoFf7457xcuKFpkaF1sQ4xn8QGSXVIzukiJxGRiNGIqn7Mfw2c_zbOnJVavxkOCHzfsCfca0HDamQMsTKi6mpv3xUe_RQ3TQOaaxF2QdQPsZyKWjeHOPElHrkArWw4R49jmyVEnzy2AocBHsb4x-qPtS5v9i6wg1pLQcbVs7JADo1WaDpb6t8bF6Wo39szKpOQ2IJOYiv68WeXXuXdGCu0muAIOBk7ns5q=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_trv0bUY059h_jNrX0A2phnzfpnbEhc2bqODwRFaMtjq37z-8Fv1Mx88BEDV-1e8oIIg989YpknrynHqPCqsoB3U0htiiJqiCiWWk6mBJQ-T08EThcf0ZEE1jfXN51b7pLOLOCx6mZqPXUO6EvQK4hOQp3YPYDXhgQHnunTpfpNkClouETVqLLJvfhjpAzMByXoPQgVDwnD7iqFacTLpNed9rj8eR-v9RM1XsrCSpFbyYkG9B2DuYQ8deWuU3Df4PGyNwDxbVZbEDiY=s0-d)
![](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vNIGmnOQyxD6L5X8eW3xeKcTvV3_1kA1KZHgV6halqFqYzwLvtmzOClgetaqsGU4N4pEAP-5laCLPuTlf9DSZyx8w7E3lvZSv32OPCaZAMKVsgTBiT2AjKf7Qaw91rs7akGTSsidblP2QTUqkn0mGbyCPeHLhiyocRJeA75-9slel3-jy12eLpvewqRvXdPxfKoXOejJPANm2JX0jSBpuqY97z3amDSk_qcCQcht1uSRc4_JLmhrr5meBzlhX_LEQc92TJG34kqYJn=s0-d)
507 U.S. 163 (1993)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Certiorari was granted to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to decide whether a
federal court was permitted to apply a "heightened pleading
standard" -- more stringent than the usual pleading requirements
of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) -- in civil rights cases alleging
municipal liability under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983.DISCUSSION
- The Court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals, which affirmed the dismissal of petitioners' complaints alleging municipal liability under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 on the ground that petitioners failed to meet the "heightened pleading standard" required by the Fifth Circuit's decisional law.
- The Court concluded that federal courts were not permitted to apply a "heightened pleading standard" -- more stringent than the usual pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) -- in civil rights cases alleging municipal liability under § 1983.
- The Court noted that Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) imposed a particularity requirement in only two specific instances, in averments of fraud or mistake, and did not impose a particularity requirement for complaints alleging municipal liability under § 1983.
- Thus, in the absence of amendment to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, federal courts and litigants had to rely on summary judgment and control of discovery to weed out unmeritorious § 1983 claims sooner rather than later.
The Court reversed a judgment affirming the dismissal of petitioners' complaints for failure to comply with heightened pleading requirements since the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure did not permit application of a heightened pleading standard in cases alleging municipal liability for constitutional injury.
Recommended Supplements for Civil Procedure
No comments:
Post a Comment