Legal Opinion

Young v. Internal Revenue Service

District Court, N.D. Indiana

Decided September 25, 1984No. Civ. F 84-135PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

LEE, District Judge.

This matter is before the court on defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss and for an Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs,” filed July 20, 1984 and plaintiff’s “Motion for Summary Judgment,” filed August 2, 1984. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion will be granted, and plaintiff’s motion will be denied.

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). This court also recognizes that federal courts have historically exercised great tolerance to insure that an impartial…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Jurldine A. Donaldson v. Paul v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1987
  2. Christensen v. WardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
  3. Snyder v. Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1984
  4. Baden v. Craig-Hallum, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1987
  5. Hilgeford v. PEOPLES BANK, PORTLAND, IND.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1985

18 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