No. 21-7001
Adam J. Tenser v. Beth Silverman, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: attorney-representation civil-rights due-process fairness judicial-interpretation legal-solicitude liberal-construction pro-se self-representation slander standing
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity DueProcess
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-04-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether this Court's articulation of the pro se liberal construction rule in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 529 (1972) implies a general withdrawal of the pro se solicitude from lawyers representing themselves in civil rights suits.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court's articulation of the pro se liberal construction rule in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 529 (1972) implies a general withdrawal of the pro solicitude from lawyers representing themselves in civil-rights suits
Docket Entries
2022-04-04
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2022.
2022-03-10
Waiver of right of respondent Beth Silverman, et al. to respond filed.
2022-01-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 28, 2022)
Attorneys
Adam J. Tenser
Adam J. Tenser — Petitioner
Beth Silverman, et al.
Christian E. Foy Magy — Collins & Collins, LLP, Respondent