No. 22-6703
Earnest A. Davis v. Government Employees Insurance Company, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: ada-accommodation case-dismissal civil-proceedings court-procedure criminal-reporting due-process equal-protection judicial-ethics racial-bias
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2023-03-31
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) Are judges in a trial court and justices in an appeals court and state supreme court in civil proceedings required to report direct evidence of crimes to the appropriate authorities for potential criminal prosecution based upon a code of ethics /cannons or can they turn a blind eye and ignore such evidence?
2) Does liberal leave to amend complaints, supported by case law apply to Black litigants as well as White litigants, or Whites only?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Are judges required to report evidence of crimes?
Docket Entries
2023-05-31
Case considered closed.
2023-04-03
The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until April 24, 2023, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
2023-03-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/31/2023.
2023-03-02
Waiver of right of respondent Walter's Auto Sales to respond filed.
2023-01-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 8, 2023)
Attorneys
Earnest A. Davis
Earnest A. Davis — Petitioner
Walter's Auto Sales
John Jerome Swenson — Scali Rasmussen, P.C., Respondent