Grant v. Cuellar

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that while this court liberally construes pro se briefs, pro se litigants “must still brief the issues”
• noting we have “considered a pro se appellant’s brief despite its technical noncompliance with the Rules of Civil Procedure when it at least argued some error on the part of the district court”
• “Although we liberally construe briefs of pro se litigants . . . pro se parties must still brief the issues . . . .”
• “[A] court does not ‘invent, out of whole cloth, novel arguments on behalf of a pro se plaintiff in the absence of meaningful, albeit imperfect briefing.’”
• “This Court has discretion to consider a noncompliant brief, and it has allowed pro se plaintiffs to proceed when the plaintiff’s noncompliance did not prejudice the opposing party.”
• finding the district court’s speculative review to be overly narrow

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).