Legal Opinion

Antonio Curtis Armour v. Michelle Kraus, Anthony W. Geller, and Holly A. Brady

District Court, N.D. Indiana

Decided May 1, 2026No. 1:26-cv-00211Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION ANTONIO CURTIS ARMOUR, Plaintiff, v. CAUSE NO. 1:26-CV-211-CCB-SJF MICHELLE KRAUS, ANTHONY W. GELLER, and HOLLY A. BRADY, Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER Antonio Curtis Armour, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint suing a public defender, an assistant United States attorney, and a federal judge. ECF 1. “A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus,

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Polk County v. DodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Mhammad Abu-Shawish v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2018

5 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