Pitts v. Cottingham

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that latitude afforded to pro se plaintiffs “does not relieve a pro se plaintiff from meeting jurisdictional requirements”
• noting that pro se plaintiffs are not excused from satisfying jurisdictional requirements
• noting that pro se plaintiffs are not excused from satisfying jurisdictional requirements
• “[T]he court does not have jurisdiction over sexual harassment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
• “This latitude [afforded to pro se plaintiffs], however, does not relieve a pro se plaintiff from meeting jurisdictional requirements.”
• \[A] court may not similarly take a liberal view of [a] jurisdictional requirement and set a different rule for pro se litigants only.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).