Robinson v. Rothchilds & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that regardless of what a dismissing court says when it dismisses a case, until a “fourth or later judge” makes an independent evaluation of the three-strikes rule, the plaintiff “remains free to argue that [a] dismissal does not count as a strike”
• explaining that the authority to determine whether an inmate’s suit counts as a “strike” rests with the court ultimately faced with deciding whether he has run afoul of § 1915(g)’s three-strikes provision
• noting that although a district court cannot prospectively find that a plaintiff has accrued one or more strikes under § 1915(g) the court may alert the plaintiff about potential consequences of future litigation
• noting that although a district court cannot prospectively find that a plaintiff has accrued one or more strikes under § 1915(g) the court may alert the plaintiff about potential consequences of future litigation
• noting that although a district court cannot prospectively find that a plaintiff has accrued one or more strikes under Section 1915(g) the court may alert the plaintiff about potential consequences of future litigation
• noting that although a district court cannot prospectively find that a plaintiff has accrued one or more strikes under Section 1915(g) the court may alert the plaintiff about potential consequences of future litigation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).