Groden v. Allen
This text of Groden v. Allen (Groden v. Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 27, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-10517 Summary Calendar
ROBERT J. GRODEN,
Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee,
versus
JACKIE DIANE ALLEN; ET AL.,
Defendants,
RICHARD BRENTON TOBIAS,
Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:03-CV-1685-R --------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Richard Brenton Tobias, a sanctioned litigant, requests
permission to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal of the district
court’s imposition of a six-month sentence of imprisonment for
contempt of court. Tobias also requests consolidation of this
appeal with case number 04-10872, emergency relief from the
contempt order, and a stay of judgment and contempt order.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 05-10517 -2-
Article III, § 2, of the Constitution limits federal court
jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies. See Spencer v.
Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998). The case-or-controversy requirement
demands that “some concrete and continuing injury other than the
now-ended incarceration or parole -- some ‘collateral
consequence’ of the conviction -- must exist if the suit is to be
maintained.” Id. (citations omitted).
Tobias has served the sentence that was imposed pursuant to
the district court’s finding of contempt. Accordingly, there is
no case or controversy for this court to address. The appeal and
Tobias’s various motions are rendered moot. See Spencer, 523
U.S. at 7. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. Tobias’s
motion to proceed as a sanctioned litigant is DENIED. All other
outstanding motions are DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Groden v. Allen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groden-v-allen-ca5-2006.