Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Smith v. City of Princeton

Civil Action No. 4:17-CV-85 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 8, 2018)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Smith v. City of Princeton

1 Citing case

  1. McCalley v. Olson

    Civil Action 4:21-CV-00511-ALM-CAN (E.D. Tex. Aug. 15, 2022)

    (“Plaintiff['s] pro se status does not excuse her from complying with federal statutes, rules of civil procedure, or local rules of court.”) (citing Hassell v. United States, 203 F.R.D. 241, 245 (N.D. Tex. 1999)), report and recommendation adopted, No. 4:17-CV-85, 2018 WL 316470 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 8, 2018); Vanderbol v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., No. 4:19-CV-119-SDJ-KPJ, 2019 WL 6117355, at *1 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 18, 2019) (finding that regardless of the plaintiff's pro se status “[a]ny future pleadings not in accordance with the Local Rules shall be struck”). ANALYSIS