Legal Opinion

Mark Labounty v. Stephen G. Adler, E. Carrillo, Walter A. Burdge, J. Grigioni, and All Program Committee Members

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided May 14, 1991No. 1188, Docket 90-2543PublishedCited by 237 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GEORGE C. PRATT, Circuit Judge:

Pro se plaintiffs create unique problems for federal courts. In recognition of this uniqueness, courts have developed some special strategies and guidelines to deal with such litigants. We are obliged to construe their pleadings and papers liberally. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). Incarcerated pro se litigants, since they cannot avail themselves of the freedom of other litigants, may “file” a notice of appeal simply by delivering it to prison authorities for mailing, rather than by actually filing it with the clerk of court…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by237 opinions

  1. Halebian v. BervCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
  2. Morris v. Northrop Grumman Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1999
  3. Geldzahler v. New York Medical CollegeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2009
  4. Greene v. WCI Holdings Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1997
  5. Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Stratton Oakmont, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1999

232 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API