Legal Opinion

Judd v. United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided October 12, 1999No. 99-5260PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Per curiam

Pro se petitioner Judd seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis under Rule 39 of this Court. We deny this request as frivolous pursuant to Rule 39.8. Judd is allowed until November 2, 1999, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit his petition in compliance with this Court’s Rule 33.1. We also direct the Clerk not to accept any further petitions for certiorari or petitions for extraordinary writs from Judd in noncriminal matters unless he first pays the docketing fee required by Rule 38 and submits his petitions in compliance with Rule 33.1.

Judd has abused this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Martin v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. In re JuddSupreme Court of the United States · 1995

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Verizon v. Federal Communications CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2014
  2. Keith Judd v. The University of New Mexico Donald Grady, II Albuquerque Police Department U.S. Secret ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
  3. Hyland v. StevensCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
  4. Judd v. FurgesonDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2002
  5. (HC) Harris v. LacknerDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API