Legal Opinion
Reed v. Dunham
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided January 10, 1990No. 88-1954PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Per curiam
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiffs, Cornelius Maple, Jr. and Martin Luther Reed, appeal from a district court order dismissing their pro se prison civil rights action as legally frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) on the basis of the pleadings and a special report compiled in accordance with Martinez v. Aaron, 570 F.2d 317, 319 (10th Cir.1978).…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Whitley v. AlbersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Hall v. BellmonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Hall v. BellmonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Swoboda v. DubachCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
- Edward Lee Clemmons v. Dale Bohannon, Robert Tansy, Herb Maschner, and Robert MillsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Swoboda v. DubachCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.