Johl v. Johl

Second Circuit

Johl v. Johl

788 F.2d 75

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 11, 1986

DocketNo. 1030, Docket 85-7957

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 788 F.2d 75 (Johl v. Johl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johl v. Johl, 788 F.2d 75 (2d Cir. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant is a pro se litigant with a long record of frivolous and vexatious proceedings in this court. We have in the past imposed sanctions upon him for filing vexatious and frivolous motions or appeals. Johl v. Town of Groton, Dkt. No. 81-7569; Johl v. Moukwasher, Dkt. No. 81-7567; Johl v. Johl, Dkt. No. 81-7327; Johl v. Town of Groton, Dkt. No. 79-6257.

[76]*76The present appeal, taken from a wholly justified dismissal for failure to prosecute, is again frivolous and vexatious. We therefore affirm and impose damages in the amount of $2000 plus double costs. Rule 38, Fed.R.App.P. The clerk of this court is directed to accept no further papers from appellant on any matter until appellant provides the court with proof of compliance with the sanctions imposed in this case and in the prior cases cited above. Schiff v. Simon & Schuster, 766 F.2d 61 (2nd Cir.1985).

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant is a pro se litigant with a long record of frivolous and vexatious proceedings in this court. We have in the past imposed sanctions upon him for filing vexatious and frivolous motions or appeals. Johl v. Town of Groton, Dkt. No. 81-7569; Johl v. Moukwasher, Dkt. No. 81-7567; Johl v. Johl, Dkt. No. 81-7327; Johl v. Town of Groton, Dkt. No. 79-6257.

[76]*76The present appeal, taken from a wholly justified dismissal for failure to prosecute, is again frivolous and vexatious. We therefore affirm and impose damages in the amount of $2000 plus double costs. Rule 38, Fed.R.App.P. The clerk of this court is directed to accept no further papers from appellant on any matter until appellant provides the court with proof of compliance with the sanctions imposed in this case and in the prior cases cited above. Schiff v. Simon & Schuster, 766 F.2d 61 (2nd Cir.1985).

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

788 F.2d 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johl-v-johl-ca2-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack