No. 23-378
Joel Douglas, et al. v. David Hirshon, et al.
Tags: civil-procedure district-court extrinsic-documents extrinsic-evidence judicial-discretion legal-procedure motion-to-dismiss pleadings public-records standard-of-review
Key Terms:
ERISA Jurisdiction JusticiabilityDoctri
ERISA Jurisdiction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-01-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the District Court was required to consider extrinsic documents that were public records or not directly challenged by anyone attached to the Response in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Was the District Court required to consider extrinsic documents that were public records, or not directly challenged by anyone attached to the Response in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss?
Docket Entries
2024-01-08
Motion for damages and costs DENIED.
2024-01-08
Petition DENIED.
2023-11-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-10-23
Motion of respondents for damages and costs pursuant to Rule 42.2 filed.
2023-09-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 13, 2023)
2023-07-20
Application (23A52) granted by Justice Jackson extending the time to file until September 28, 2023.
2023-07-18
Application (23A52) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 30, 2023 to September 28, 2023, submitted to Justice Jackson.
Attorneys
David Hirshon, et al.
Marshall J. Tinkle — Thompson, MacColl & Bass , Respondent
Marshall J. Tinkle — Thompson, MacColl & Bass , Respondent
Joel Douglas, et al.
Robert Clayton Andrews — Robert C. Andrews Esquire, PC, Petitioner
Robert Clayton Andrews — Robert C. Andrews Esquire, PC, Petitioner