Topic: no presumptive truthfulness attaches to plaintiffs allegati… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #5511

11 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 62 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Richard Augustine v. United States.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Richard Augustine v. United States Anchor
ca9 · 1983
green “no presumptive truthfulness attaches to plaintiffs allegations, and the existence of disputed material facts will not preclude the trial court from evaluating for itself the merits of jurisdictional claims.” 11
2 William St. Clair John Shelton v. City of Chico County of Butte
ca9 · 1989
green “rely on affidavits or any other evidence properly before the court.” 9
3 Thornhill Publishing Company, Inc. v. General Telephone & Electronics Corporation
ca9 · 1979
green “a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction may either attack the allegations of the complaint or may be made as a 'speaking motion' attacking the existence of subject matter jurisdiction in fact.” 7
4 Freddie L. Johnson and Clara Johnson, Husband and Wife, and Cross v. United States of America, and Cross-Appellee v. Timothy B. Hay, Third Party
ca3 · 1983
green “the location of the nco club should not obscure the fact that johnson was performing a non-military job in what was essentially a civilian context.” 5
5 Janice Bon v. United States
ca9 · 1986
green “did not occupy a status similar to that of any civilian with respect to her presence on and use of the special service center's facilities.” 5
6 Ernst & Whinney v. Bradford-White Corp.
scotus · 1989
green “it then becomes necessary for the party opposing the motion to present affidavits or any other evidence necessary to satisfy its burden of establishing that the court, in fact, possesses subject matter jurisdiction.” 5
7 Freddie L. Johnson and Clara Johnson, Husband and Wife, and Cross v. United States of America, and Cross-Appellee v. Timothy B. Hay, Third Party
ca3 · 1983
green “the most relevant line of inquiry is whether or not the service member's activities at the time of injury are of the sort that could harm the disciplinary system if litigated in a civil action.” 4
8 Robert Roush v. United States of America, Command Club Management Systems, Enlisted Men's Club
ca9 · 1985
green “was present in the club at the time of his injury solely by virtue of being a member of the marine corps.” 4
9 Robert Roush v. United States of America, Command Club Management Systems, Enlisted Men's Club
ca9 · 1985
green “whether the operation of the club ... at the time of the accident was under the direct command of senior military personnel or that roush and the bouncer were at the time subject to military discipline for any violation of the existing regulations governing such club.” 4
10 Janice Bon v. United States
ca9 · 1986
green “was subject to military discipline only in the sense that members of the military are at all times subject to the orders of their commanding and superior officers,” 4
11 Purcell v. Commissioner
scotus · 1988
green “whether the suit requires the civilian court to second-guess military decisions, ... and whether the suit might impair essential military discipline.” 4

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check