Legal Opinion
John Charles Thomas v. Harry R. Howard, Esquire
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided February 9, 1972No. 71-1288PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
In this ease, appellant, a prisoner of the State of New Jersey, is suing, under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1970), the attorney who voluntarily represented him during post-conviction proceedings, on the ground that the defendant “did not fully represent your plaintiff to the best of his ability.” Although appellant demanded money damages, his brief is addressed to the legality of his conviction. However, that matter is not properly before us in this case because it was not raised or considered below. Furthermore, the complaint may not be construed as a petition…
3Cases cited3 opinions
- Aileen Henig, a Minor Together With Ludwig Henig and Geneva M. Henig, Her Parents v. Rocco A. OdoriosoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- Pugliano v. StaziakDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- Albert C. Hughes v. Howard Smith and Robert TatumCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
4Cited by47 opinions
- Hall v. QuillenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1980
- Polite v. DiehlCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
- Joseph Carl Brown, Jr. v. Richard P. Joseph, EsquireCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- United States of America Ex Rel. George Simmons v. Mr. Robert J. Zibilich, Attorney at LawCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- Owens v. ArmstrongDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2016
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.