In re Thomas
181 L. Ed. 2d 442, 132 S. Ct. 588, 565 U.S. 1033, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8101, 80 U.S.L.W. 3299
Opinion
Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-[443]*443peris 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).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Thomas, 181 L. Ed. 2d 442, 132 S. Ct. 588, 565 U.S. 1033, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8101, 80 U.S.L.W. 3299 (U.S. 2011).
181 L. Ed. 2d 442 (In re Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals
506 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1992)