No. 18-9141
Matthew James Griffin v. Unknown Gregoline, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-law article-iii civil-procedure civil-rights due-process federal-courts standing
Key Terms:
Punishment Jurisdiction
Punishment Jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION #1: Whether the District Court erred in granting Defendants summary judgment on the disputed material facts of this case?
QUESTION #2: Whether the District Court erred in denying Plaintiffs Motions (doc. 46 and 61) to take telephonic depositions of the Defendants and their expert medical witnesses by non-stenographic means?
QUESTION #3: Whether the District Court erred in entering, sua sponte, a protective order prohibiting Plaintiff from taking depositions, except upon extraordinary circumstances.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the court of appeals err in holding that the petitioners lacked Article III standing to challenge the government's action?
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-03
Waiver of right of respondents John Gregoline and Corrections Corporation of America to respond filed.
2018-09-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 5, 2019)
Attorneys
John Gregoline and Corrections Corporation of America
Nicholas D. Acedo — Struck Love Bojanowski & Acedo, PLC, Respondent
Matthew James Griffin
Matthew James Griffin — Petitioner