Robert L. Brewster v. North American Van Lines, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming a district court’s denial of IFP based on salary alone
• affirming a district court’s denial of IFP based on salary alone
• “Plaintiff argued at oral argument before our Court that his salary should not be determinative . . . since he could lose his employment at any time. We feel this argument is superfluous.”
• “Plaintiff argued at oral argument before our Court that his salary should not be determinative . . . since he could lose his employment at any time. We feel this argument is superfluous.”
• “Plaintiff argued at oral argument before our Court that his salary should not be determinative . . . since he could lose his employment at any time. We feel this argument is superfluous.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).