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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 206 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 Burgos v. Hopkins.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Burgos v. Hopkins Anchor | green | “to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.” | 72 |
| 2 | Sealed v. Sealed 1 | green | “on occasions too numerous to count, we have reminded district courts” | 48 |
| 3 | Burgos v. Hopkins | green | “we read a pro se litigant's supporting papers liberally, and will interpret them to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.” | 43 |
| 4 | Phillips v. Girdich | green | “we leave it for the district court to determine what other claims, if any, plaintiff has raised. in so doing, the court's imagination should be limited only by plaintiff's factual allegations, not by the legal claims set out in his pleadings.” | 43 |
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.