MEDINA
v.
KANSAS; MCDONALD V. YELLOW CAB METRO, INC.; QUINN V. FELTHAM ET AL.; OYEGBOLA V. UNITED STATES; SCHULTZ ET UX. V. PARR ELEVATOR, INC.; CARVER V. CARVER ET AL.

U.S. | 1992-10-05
Nos. 91-8579; No. 91-8581; No. 91-8773; No. 92-5047; No. 92-5205; No. 92-5384
506 U.S. 810 Supreme Court of the United States (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Dissent
Justice Blackmun and Justice Stevens,

Justice Blackmun and Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petitions for writs of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motions to proceed in forma pauperis.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Jones v. Abc-Tv, 516 U.S. 363 (U.S. 1996)
    …Rule 38 and submits his petition in compliance with Rule 33.1. Jones has abused this Court’s certiorari process. In October 1992, we first invoked Rule 39.8 to deny Jones informa pauperis status in two petitions for certiorari. See Jones v. Wright, 506 U. S. 810; In re Jones, 506 U. S. 810. At that time, Jones had filed over 25 petitions in this Court, all of which were patently frivolous and had been denied without [*364] recorded dissent. And since October 1992, we have invoked Rule 39.8 five times to den…
  • Dempsey v. Martin, 528 U.S. 7 (U.S. 1999)
    …ule 33.1. Dempsey has abused this Court’s certiorari and extraordinary writ processes. On October 5, 1992, we invoked Rule 39.8 to deny Dempsey in forma pauperis status with respect to a petition for certiorari. See Dempsey v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 506 U. S. 810. At that time, Dempsey had filed II petitions for certiorari and 1 petition for an extraordinary writ, all of which were both frivolous and had been denied without recorded dissent. Since that time, Dempsey has filed five petitions for certiorari, a…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw