John H. Gordon v. Jack Watson, III and George Cansler

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that courts “may not consider” an unsworn statement when determining the propriety of summary judgment
• explaining that unsworn statements, even by pro se parties, should not be “consider[ed] in determining the propriety of summary judgment”
• affirming dismissal of prisoner’s civil rights suit for failure to satisfy the mandatory exhaustion requirements of the PLRA
• explaining On September 2, 2020, Kister left the residential treatment unit at BCF to place a mental health referral form in the institutional mailbox—requesting to see his mental health counselor. (Doc. 1 at p. 4; Doc. 27 at p. 1; Doc. 28-1 at p. 1
• “[P]ro se litigants are ndt held to the same standards of compliance with formal or technical pleading rules applied to attorneys.... ”
• “[D]istrict court[s] ha[ve] ample discretion to call upon the parties to remedy the defects [in summary judgment materials], by submitting supplemental affidavits or otherwise.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).