Jeanna Norris v. Samuel Stanley, Jr.

Oral argument

• Argued

  29 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a plaintiff stated a discrimination claim when she alleged on information and belief that “similarly situated loan applicants who were not in the protected classes . . . were treated more favorably”
• stating that “[i]n reviewing a motion to dismiss, [the court] accept[s] the allegations in the complaint as true.”
• explaining that, “even after Twombly, dismissal of a pro se claim as insufficiently pleaded is appropriate only in the most unsustainable of cases”
• noting that “a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers”
• noting that a pro se complaint, “however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers”
• explaining that McDonnell Douglas is “an evidentiary standard, not a pleading requirement” (quoting Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 510, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).