Gerstenbluth v. Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that an issue mentioned only \in passing\ by a pro se litigant was not properly presented for federal appellate review
• concluding that a pro se litigant forfeited his challenge because he only mentioned the district court’s ruling “obliquely and in passing”
• holding that a pro se appellant forfeited all claims against one appellee by referencing the district court’s adverse ruling only “obliquely and in passing”
• concluding that a pro se litigant forfeited his challenge to an aspect of the district court’s judgment that he only referenced “obliquely and in passing”
• concluding that a pro se litigant forfeited a challenge to the district court’s adverse ruling mentioned only “obliquely and in passing” in his opening brief
• concluding that a pro se litigant forfeited his argument that the district court erred because he mentioned its ruling only “obliquely and in passing”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).