No. 20-7660
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 8th-circuit civil-procedure civil-rights due-process indigent injunctive-relief mentally-disabled pro-se standing statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2021-05-27
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the 8th Cir. Appellate Court should have used "special care" when dealing with a mentally disabled, indigent, pro se Plaintiff under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d)(e) and appointed an attorney to help him.
2. Whether the 8th Cir. Appellate Court should have granted emergency injunctive reliefs against an ODNI covert community operating inside the CCJW, when proof is available that past covert operations were conducted within it.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the 8th Cir. Appellate Court should have used 'special care' when dealing with a mentally disabled, indigent, pro se Plaintiff under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d)(e) and appointed an attorney to help him
Docket Entries
2021-06-01
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/27/2021.
2021-05-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-02-24
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 5, 2021)
Attorneys
Justin Paul Sulzner
Justin Paul Sulzner — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent