Legal Opinion
Day v. Day
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided October 12, 1993No. 92-8788PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Per curiam
Pro se petitioner Roy A. Day requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis under Rule 39 of this Court. We deny this request pursuant to Rule 39.8. Day is allowed until November 2, 1993, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit his petitions in compliance with *2this Court’s Rule 33. We also direct the Clerk not to accept any further petitions for certiorari from Day in noncriminal matters unless he pays the docketing fee required by Rule 38 and submits his petition in compliance with Rule 33.
Day is an abuser of this Court’s certiorari process. We first invoked…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Martin v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- In re McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- In Re SindramSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- In re DaySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
3Cited by60 opinions
- Whitaker v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. LanoueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
- Attwood v. SingletarySupreme Court of Florida · 1995
- In the Matter of United Markets International, Inc., Debtor. W. Steve Smith, Trustee v. R. David LeggCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- In Re TelfairDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2010
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.