No. 19-34

Paul Maravelias v. David DePamphilis

Lower Court: New Hampshire
Docketed: 2019-07-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: attorney-fees civil-procedure due-process equal-protection extraordinary-sanction findings-of-fact first-amendment original-jurisdiction pre-deprivation-hearing retaliation rule-of-law standing supreme-court vagueness
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Patent ClassAction
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Did the NHSC violate the Due Process Clause to deny Petitioner's requested pre-deprivation hearing and by failing to make a single finding of fact in support, while exercising original jurisdiction over the "extraordinary" sanction?

2. Did the NHSC retaliate against Petitioner to punish his critical speech, violating the 1st Amendment, and/or violate the "class of one" Equal Protection doctrine by issuing a two-sentence Order awarding $4,900 against him?

3. Is NHSC Rule 23 facially invalid under the 14th Amendment for vagueness and/or substantial lack of due process protections?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the NHSC violate the Due Process Clause to deny Petitioner's requested pre-deprivation hearing and by failing to make a single finding of fact in support, while exercising original jurisdiction over the 'extraordinary' sanction?

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 2, 2019)
PetitionAppendixCertificate of Word CountProof of Service

Attorneys

Paul Maravelias
Paul Maravelias — Petitioner