Mikkilineni v. Gallitzin Borough

531 U.S. 804, 121 S. Ct. 281
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 2, 2000·No. No. 99-9947·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s 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 the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).

Justice Stevens dissents.

See id., at 4, and cases cited therein. Reported below: 216 F. 3d 1076 judgments); 215 F. 3d 1315 (fourth and fifth judgments).

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

Mikkilineni v. Gallitzin Borough, 531 U.S. 804, 121 S. Ct. 281 (2000).

531 U.S. 804 (Mikkilineni v. Gallitzin Borough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mikkilineni v. Penn National Mutual Casualty Insurance
271 F. Supp. 2d 142 (District of Columbia, 2003)