Hazel v. Wilson

181 L. Ed. 2d 6, 132 S. Ct. 379, 565 U.S. 805, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6580, 80 U.S.L.W. 3193
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedOctober 3, 2011
DocketNo. 10-11275
StatusPublished

This text of 181 L. Ed. 2d 6 (Hazel v. Wilson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hazel v. Wilson, 181 L. Ed. 2d 6, 132 S. Ct. 379, 565 U.S. 805, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6580, 80 U.S.L.W. 3193 (U.S. 2011).

Opinion

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court’s process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petition in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition is 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).

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

Related

Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals
506 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 L. Ed. 2d 6, 132 S. Ct. 379, 565 U.S. 805, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6580, 80 U.S.L.W. 3193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hazel-v-wilson-scotus-2011.