Nixon v. Phillipoff
District Court, N.D. Indiana
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
WILLIAM C. LEE, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on motions to dismiss filed by all of the defendants in this cause. For the following reasons, the motions to dismiss will be granted.
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). The district court’s role is to ensure that the claims of pro se litigants are given “fair and meaningful consideration.” Matzker v. Herr, 748 F.2d 1142, 1146 (7th Cir.1984); Caruth v. Pinkney, 683 F.2d 1044, 1050 (7th Cir. 1982). This court also…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Dairy Queen, Inc. v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Curtis v. LoetherSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Britt v. Federal Land Bank Ass'n of St. LouisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1987
- Nixon v. Individual Head of St. Joseph Mortgage Co.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1985
- Golyar v. McCauslandDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1990
- Nixon v. RoseDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1985
- United States v. SchiefenDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1995
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.