Legal Opinion

In Re Amendment to Rule 39

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 13, 1991Published

1Opinion of the Court

500 U.S. 13 (1991)

IN RE AMENDMENT TO RULE 39.

No. ____.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided April 29, 1991.

2Per curiam

We are ordering an amendment to this Court's Rule 39 respecting proceedings in forma pauperis.

Filings under our paid docket require a not-insubstantial filing fee, currently $300, and compliance with our printing requirements. See Rules 33 and 38. These Rules serve as some disincentive to frivolous paid filings. Furthermore, we have the ability to exercise control over the paid docket under Rule 42.2, which provides for award of "just damages and single or double costs" in the case of a…

Also in this document: Dissent · Marshall; Dissent · Stevens.

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re Amendment to Rule 39Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Hyde v. Van WormerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Hatch v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API