Norman L. Clark v. State of Georgia Pardons and Paroles Board

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that, in reviewing for fri- volity, we may sua sponte consider an immunity defense that is “ap- parent from the face of the complaint”
• explaining that a complaint that presents time-barred claims warrants dismissal as frivolous
• ‘The expiration of the statute of limitations ... warrants a dismissal [under the PLRA] as frivolous.”
• “The expiration of the statute of limitations . . . warrants a dismissal as frivolous.”
• “More important, Neitzke does not purport to address or to limit the full range of circumstances that might make an IFP case frivolous.”
• “[I]f a plain- tiff . . . has a long history of bringing unmeritorious litigation, [a] court can consider that fact” in assessing frivolity.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).