Keith A. Mira v. Ronald C. Marshall

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the District Court did not err in failing to grant de novo review to an objection “to each and every finding of the Magistrate”
• stating that the district court need not consider objections that are “frivolous, conclusive, or general” because “the parties have the duty to pinpoint those portions of the magistrate’s report that the district court must specially consider”
• “Just as a complaint stating only ‘I complain’ states no claim, an objection stating only ‘I object’ preserves no issue for review.” (citation omitted)
• “The parties have the duty to pinpoint those portions of the magistrate’s report that the district court must specially consider”
• “The parties have a duty to pinpoint those portions of the magistrate’s report that the district court must specially consider.”
• “The decision to appoint counsel for a federal habeas petitioner is within the discretion of the court and is required only where the interests of justice or due process so require.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).