Quintin Orpiano v. Gene M. Johnson, Warden W. P. Rodgers, Asst. Warden (Security) R. A. Clendenen Correctional Corporal

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R
• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R
• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R
• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R
• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R
• concluding that de novo review was still required under these decisions where a pro se litigant had objected to specific factual findings in the M&R

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).