From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leviness v. Bannon

United States District Court, D. Connecticut
Dec 20, 2000
Civil No. 3:99CV01647(AWT) (D. Conn. Dec. 20, 2000)

Opinion

Civil No. 3:99CV01647(AWT).

December 20, 2000.


ENDORSEMENT ORDER


The plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration and Reargument [Doc. # 20] is hereby DENIED. The requirement, as stated in Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 120 S.Ct. 1073 (2000), is not merely that the plaintiff alleged different treatment without a rational basis, as contended by the plaintiff at page 3 of his motion. Village of Willowbrook contemplates that the plaintiff will allege that he "has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment." Id. at 1074 (emphasis added). Moreover, the Court explained that this standard is to be understood in the context of the fact that the equal protection clause protects individuals against "intentional and arbitrary discrimination." Id. at 1075 (emphasis added).

The allegations in the complaint do not constitute specific, non-conclusory factual allegations that satisfy this standard. Therefore, even when the court applies the holding and the language from Village of Willowbrook to the complaint in this case, the complaint is deficient.

Accordingly, the plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. No extensions will be granted.

It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Leviness v. Bannon

United States District Court, D. Connecticut
Dec 20, 2000
Civil No. 3:99CV01647(AWT) (D. Conn. Dec. 20, 2000)
Case details for

Leviness v. Bannon

Case Details

Full title:OSMUND W. LEVINESS, Plaintiff, v. MARK BANNON, et al. Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Connecticut

Date published: Dec 20, 2000

Citations

Civil No. 3:99CV01647(AWT) (D. Conn. Dec. 20, 2000)