Legal Opinion
Patterson v. Aiken
District Court, N.D. Georgia
Decided July 31, 1985No. Civ. A. C85-3501APublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
FORRESTER, District Judge.
This civil action, filed pro se by the plaintiff informa pauperis, is before the court for a frivolity determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). While it is the customary practice for this court to forward in forma pauperis lawsuits to the Magistrate for a determination of indigency, and then forward the file to a district judge for a determination of frivolity, prior to authorizing the service of process, in the instant case this procedure was not followed. The Clerk brought the error to the court’s attention immediately after summonses were issued to all…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Pierson v. RaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Norman L. Clark v. State of Georgia Pardons and Paroles BoardCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- James Thomas Patterson, Sr. v. Lawrence L. AikenCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988
- Marcus B. Harris v. Walter Heinrich, David M. Parrish, Benny BakerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- In Re Joint Eastern & Southern Districts Asbestos LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1990
- Hampton v. KempDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 2025
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.