Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 219 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 Roy Brown v. Linda Matauszak.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Roy Brown v. Linda Matauszak Anchor | green | “a court cannot create a claim which a plaintiff has not spelled out in his pleading.” | 62 |
| 2 | Eric Martin v. William Overton | green | “liberal construction does not require a court to conjure allegations on a litigant's behalf.” | 52 |
| 3 | Erwin v. Edwards | green | “liberal construction does not require a court to conjure allegations on a litigant's behalf.” | 42 |
| 4 | Timothy Sampson v. Cathy Garrett | green | “even a pro se prisoner must link his allegations to material facts...and indicate what each defendant did to violate his rights...” | 27 |
| 5 | Frank Nali v. J. Ekman | green | “when a pro se litigant asks us to identify any potentially winning arguments in his lower court pleadings, he is asking us to create, not correct, potential disparities in the legal system.” | 13 |
| 6 | David Clark v. N. Johnston | green | “is not without its limits, and does not 'abrogate basic pleading essentials in pro se suits.” | 9 |
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.