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.
9 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 3,853 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 Kelley Mala v. Crown Bay Marina.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kelley Mala v. Crown Bay Marina Anchor | green | “pro se litigants still must allege sufficient facts in their complaints to support a claim.” | 1,549 |
| 2 | Clarence Schreane v. Seana | green | “the legal standard for dismissing a complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 u.s.c. 1915 (e)(2)(b)(ii) is the same as that for dismissing a complaint pursuant to federal rule of civil procedure 12(b)(6).” | 581 |
| 3 | Kelley Mala v. Crown Bay Marina | green | “cannot flout procedural rules - they must abide by the same rules that apply to all other litigants.” | 543 |
| 4 | Rode v. Dellarciprete | green | “personal involvement requires particular 'allegations of personal direction or of actual knowledge and acquiescence.” | 434 |
| 5 | Kelley Mala v. Crown Bay Marina | green | “apply the relevant legal principle even when the complaint has failed to name it.” | 401 |
| 6 | Fair Wind Sailing Inc v. H. Dempster | green | “a claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” | 209 |
| 7 | Joseph Brown v. Sage | green | “a court has the authority to dismiss a case 'at any time,' 28 u.s.c. 1915 (e)(2), regardless of the status of a filing fee; that is, a court has the discretion to consider the merits of a case and evaluate an ifp application in either order or even simultaneously.” | 75 |
| 8 | Dique v. New Jersey State Police | green | “a section 1983 claim is characterized as a personal-injury claim and thus is governed by the applicable state's statute of limitations for personal-injury claims.” | 44 |
| 9 | Melvin P. Deutsch v. United States | green | “cost-free access to the federal courts,” | 17 |
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.