In Re Amendment to Rule 39
Supreme Court of the United States
1Per curiam
We are ordering an amendment to this Court’s Rule 39 respecting proceedings informa pauperis.
Filings under our paid docket require a not-insubstantial filing fee, currently $300, and compliance with our printing requirements. See Rules 33 and 38. These Rules serve as some disincentive to frivolous paid filings. Furthermore, we have the ability to exercise control over the paid docket under Rule 42.2, which provides for award of “just damages and single or double costs” in the case of a frivolous filing. See Hatch v. Reliance Ins. Co., 474 U. S. 1048 (1986); Hyde v. Van Wormer, 474 U. S. 992…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hyde v. Van WormerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hatch v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
3Cited by17 opinions
- Melvin P. Deutsch v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Zatko v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- In Re TelfairDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2010
- James Blakely v. Robert WardsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Brazil v. Menard, Inc.District Court, D. South Dakota · 2022
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.