Case Citator › Young v. City of St. Charles

Young v. City of St. Charles

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Eighth Circuit
Citation
244 F.3d 623
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
34 of 34
Citing cases (total)
34
Treatment dates
2007
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Abrogated only as to the former “no set of facts” test for dismissing a complaint. All 34 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

Young v. City of St. Charles repeated that test, which Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly later retired. Margulis v. Generation Life Ins. cites Young for the continuing purpose of a motion to dismiss while expressly recognizing that Twombly abrogated the older pleading test. Young's procedural and substantive due process holdings are unaffected. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

34 later cases cite Young v. City of St. Charles; 34 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Young v. City of St. Charles?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court retired the “no set of facts” pleading test that Young had repeated; a complaint must now state a plausible claim.

    Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We could go on, but there is no need to pile up further citations to show that Conley’s “no set of facts” language has been questioned, criticized, and explained away long enough. ... this famous observation has earned its retirement.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Young v. City of St. Charles and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace