Hafed v. Israel

176 L. Ed. 2d 176, 130 S. Ct. 1692, 559 U.S. 967, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1935, 78 U.S.L.W. 3500
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 1, 2010·No. No. 09-8128·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, [177]*177and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U.S. 1, 113 S. Ct. 397, 121 L. Ed. 2d 305 (1992) (per curiam). Justice Stevens dissents. See id., at 4, 113 S. Ct. 397, 121 L. Ed. 2d 305, and cases cited therein.

Same case below, 352 Fed. Appx. 448.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hafed v. Israel, 176 L. Ed. 2d 176, 130 S. Ct. 1692, 559 U.S. 967, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1935, 78 U.S.L.W. 3500 (U.S. 2010).

176 L. Ed. 2d 176 (Hafed v. Israel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hafed v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
635 F.3d 1172 (Tenth Circuit, 2011)