In re Ruston

Supreme Court

In re Ruston

181 L. Ed. 2d 443, 132 S. Ct. 601, 565 U.S. 1033, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8231, 80 U.S.L.W. 3299

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 14, 2011·No. No. 11-6961·Published

Opinion

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris denied, and petition for writ of mandamus 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 the 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). Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.

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

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris denied, and petition for writ of mandamus 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 the 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). Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.

In re Ruston, 181 L. Ed. 2d 443, 132 S. Ct. 601, 565 U.S. 1033, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8231, 80 U.S.L.W. 3299 (U.S. 2011).

Pincite

181 L. Ed. 2d 443 (In re Ruston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related