Toevs v. Reid

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that periodic reviews that were not “meaningful” violated prisoner’s due process rights
• explaining that even prisoners proceeding pro se must make clear arguments in their opening brief
• explaining that “[a]rguments not clearly made in a party’s opening brief are deemed waived” and noting that we have “not hesitated” to apply this rule to pro se litigants
• noting that “[a]rguments not clearly made in a party’s opening brief are deemed waived” and that this applies even to pro se litigants who “are entitled to liberal construction of their filings”
• applying to pro se litigant rule that “[a]rguments not clearly made in a party’s opening brief are deemed waived”
• explaining a district court can refuse to appoint counsel in all but “extreme case[s] where the lack of counsel results in fundamental unfairness”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).