Gallop v. Cheney
660 F.3d 580
2d Cir.2011Background
- Gallop, an Army specialist, was in the Pentagon with her infant on 9/11 when the building collapsed on her and her child, causing injuries.
- She and her son alleged head and brain injuries and asserted a nonfrivolous theory of liability against senior government officials.
- Gallop filed in 2008 alleging Bivens claims, conspiracy to cause death and great bodily harm, and a violation of the Antiterrorism Act (18 U.S.C. § 2333(a)).
- The district court dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) as frivolous with prejudice, and the Second Circuit affirmed on de novo review.
- Gallop argued the district court erred in accepting only conclusory allegations and in denying leave to amend; the government asserted immunity and failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gallop's complaint plausibly states a claim against high officials | Gallop contends there are well-pleaded facts showing conspiracy and causation | Defendants argue allegations are speculative and conclusory | Yes, claims are frivolous and properly dismissed |
| Whether the conspiracy allegations are adequately pleaded | Gallop asserts a meeting of the minds with corroborating facts | Conspiracy claims are conclusory and lack factual corroboration | No; conspiracy allegations are baseless and speculative |
| Whether leave to amend should have been granted | Gallop sought broader facts to state a claim | Amendment not clearly warranted or requested | Not error; no indication amendment would cure defects |
| Whether sanctions for frivolous appeal are warranted | N/A | Appeal frivolous and vexatious | Authorized; sanctions potentially imposed; ordered show cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (S. Ct. 2009) (plausibility standard for pleading; facts needed beyond naked assertions)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (S. Ct. 2007) (plausibility standard; allegations must rise above speculative level)
- ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd., 493 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2007) (grounds to state a claim; non-conclusory factual allegations needed)
- Leon v. Murphy, 988 F.2d 303 (2d Cir.1993) (conspiracy claims with only conclusory allegations fail to state a claim)
- Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25 (S. Ct. 1992) (concept of factually frivolous pleadings)