Supreme Court· 6/21/2004

Pliler v. Ford

Citations

542 U.S. 225
124 S. Ct. 2441
159 L. Ed. 2d 338
2004 U.S. LEXIS 4384

How courts have described this case

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

holding that District Courts “have no obligation to act as counsel or paralegal” to pro se litigants
holding that federal district judges aren’t required to warn pro se litigants about statutes of limitations
holding that judges are not required to warn litigants of AEDPA time limits
holding that district courts are not required to give specific advisements prior to dismissal of a mixed petition or “to act as counsel or paralegal to pro se litigants”
concluding that district judges have no obligation to act as counsel or paralegal to pro se litigants, noting that being too proactive on the pro se litigant’s behalf can undermine a judge’s role as an impartial decision maker
holding that district courts are not required to warn pro se habeas petitioners that their federal claims could be time-barred absent equitable tolling if a petitioner opts to dismiss a mixed petition without prejudice and to return to state court to exhaust all claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Thomas, O'Connor, Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

129 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Pliler v. Ford

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.