Viewing Single Post From: KC responds on Iqbal

Viewing Single Post From: KC responds on Iqbal
Baldo	Jul 2 2009, 01:16 AM
Posts: 8,510 Group: Tier2 Member #45 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	“At this stage, Plaintiffs should not be allowed to file yet another amended complaint to attempt to correct their pleading deficiencies. Iqbal did not create new pleading standards; it confirmed the pleading standards of Rule 8 that the Supreme Court had already articulated in Twombly, which was decided before any of Plaintiffs’ complaints were filed. Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint is already 427 pages long, with 1,384 distinct allegations and 28 exhibits. After multiple tries, it is unlikely that Plaintiffs are capable of inserting any more factual material that would cure the deficiencies in their claims. To allow them to amend their complaint once again, after extensive briefing has already been completed, would be a waste of both the parties’ and the court’s resources.” - Duke Reply (footnote 8 page 6) (Repeated in multiple briefs.) But Jamie did not give the actual directions of the SCOTUS decision in regards to Iqbal, which is crucial to understanding the factors which will have to be the legal foundation for Judge Beaty's ultimate decision. "The justices sent the case back to the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which now must decide whether to allow Mr. Iqbal to try to present more evidence to substantiate his claims. Mr. Iqbal's claims against lower-level officials, including guards and supervisors at the detention center, are unaffected by the court's ruling." Tuesday, May 19, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/18/AR2009051802815.html The claims against Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Mueller were not dismissed. They were sent back to the 2nd Court of Appeals to decide whether to allow Iqbal to present more evidence in a filing. I agree Iqbal's claims against the US Attorney General and the FBI Director were indeed a stretch because he never made that direct connection to them. It was simply accusatory. HOWEVER, Iqbal's claims against lower level officials were unaffected by the SCOTUS filing. IMHO The miscreants in Durham at the Duke along with Nifong won't escape discovery. There is more than enough direct contact, intentional orders, and proof that the Plaintiff's civil rights were violated intentionally in the lawsuits. The lawsuits already have met that level. We don't know how Judge Beaty will rule, but I doubt he will overreach the decision of the SCOTUS which he would have to if he granted Jamie's filing. Edited by Baldo, Jul 3 2009, 02:10 PM.


KC responds on Iqbal · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers