No. 20-6235
Mario Montano v. Court of Appeals of Michigan
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: abuse-of-discretion access-to-courts court-sanctions due-process indigent-litigants indigent-rights judicial-abuse judicial-authority legal-merit procedural-fairness sanctions
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Did the Michigan Supreme Court abuse its authority by sanctioning the
indigent Petitioner $1000 payable to the Clerk of the Court that it knew he
could not afford to pay without cause or legal merit for doing so?
2. Did the Michigan Supreme Court abuse its authority by issuing orders
depriving the indigent Petitioner of any ability to defend himself in the
Michigan Supreme Court without cause or legal merit for doing so?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Michigan Supreme Court abuse its authority by sanctioning the indigent Petitioner $1000 payable to the Clerk of the Court that it knew he could not afford to pay without cause or legal merit for doing so?
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-22
Application (20A112) denied by Justice Kavanaugh.
2020-12-16
Application (20A112) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
2020-12-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent Michigan Court of Appeals / Michigan Supreme Court to respond filed.
2020-10-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2020)
Attorneys
Mario Montano
Mario A. Montano — Petitioner
Michigan Court of Appeals / Michigan Supreme Court
Fadwa A. Hammoud — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent