Dioguardi v. Durning - granted,” assuming all elements...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Dioguardi v. Durning 139 F.2d 774 (1944) Fact: Operative Facts: A man filed a complaint to court, under the federal rules pleading. He stated that he had made a bid on a bottle for $110, and the other party won the bid, even though they didn’t build $120. Also, other allegations. The court dismissed the case because they stated that it “failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.” He remanded it, and they dismissed it again. Dioguardi then filed in appellate court. Issue: Whether his complaint should have withstood the test of motion to dismiss. Rule: The compliant must be stated in a manner that it is “a claim upon which relief can be
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: granted,” assuming all elements are met. Rational: The Circuit court states that the trial court used the wrong test for motion to dismiss. The real test is if the claim was stated well enough that a relief can be granted. But the trial court used “to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action” raising the bar higher then it’s suppose to. Holding: The trial was reversed and remanded, so the man can go through the trial process. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online