Legal Opinion
Aruanno v. Davis
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided September 4, 2014No. Civil Action Nos. 14-3413 (WJM), 14-5099(WJM), 14-5100(WJM)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARTINI, District Judge:
Presently before this Court are two civii complaints which Joseph Aruanno, who is civilly committed to the Special Treatment Unit (“STU”) under the New Jersey Sexually Violent Predator Act, seeks to file *619without prepayment of the filing fee, and Aruanno’s apparent request to file a petition for mandamus without prepayment of the filing fee. For the reasons expressed below, this Court will direct Aruanno to show cause why this Court should not deny his applications to proceed in forma pauperis in these cases because he has abused the privilege of proceeding in…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Martin v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- In re McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Debro S. Abdul-Akbar v. Roderick R. MckelvieCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- GENCARELLI v. THE COCA-COLA COMPANYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2019
- SHAIKH v. OCEAN COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2024