Shepherd v. Truex

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that pro se litigants are held to the same standard as legal counsel; thus, poorly developed, non-cogent arguments are waived
• stating that we will not “become an advocate for one of the parties” by developing a cogent argument on a party’s behalf
• while appellant cited some authority, he “wholly fail[ed] to explain in what way, if at all, the referenced authority affect[ed] or relate[d] to the present case”
• if the appellate court constructs argument, it abdicates its role as “impartial tribunal”
• if the appellate court constructs argument, it abdicates its role as “impartial tribunal”
• \It is well settled that we will not consider an appellant's assertion on appeal when he has failed to present cogent argument supported by authority and references to the record as required by the rules.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).