Josephine Brown v. Aristedes Zavaras, Robert Furlong

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that conclusory allegations, without corresponding factual basis, were insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss
• holding that even pro se litigants must do more than advance conclusory allegations regarding constitutional claims
• holding transsexual plaintiff was not a member of a protected class for purposes of the Equal Protection Clause
• holding conclusory allegations, without corresponding factual basis, were insufficient to withstand motion to dismiss
• stating that “[r]ecent research . . . suggests reevaluating Holloway” but “declin[ing] to make such an evaluation in this case” and instead following Holloway
• stating that complaint’s allegations were “too conclusory” to allow for complete equal protection analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).