Legal Opinion
Ruth v. Congress of United States
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 6, 1976No. Civ. A. No. 76-1553PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BIUNNO, District Judge.
Herman Max Ruth has submitted a civil complaint along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The court is satisfied of his financial inabili*677ty to pay filing fees,1 and a separate order to that end has been entered.
The caption names the “Congress of the United States, et al.” as defendants; the body indicates that the defendants are the “Congress and Senate [sic] of the United States in its entirety”'.
Jurisdiction is claimed under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 et seq. (these sections confer no jurisdiction but are miscellaneous general provisions…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Scott v. PlanteCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- John William Smith v. Dominick Spina, Individually and as Director of the Police Department of the City of Newark, N. J.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- Robinson v. CahillSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1976
- Boruski v. StewartDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1974
- Daves v. ScrantonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Holsey v. BassDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1981
- Keno v. DoeDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1977
- Gordon v. Secretary of State of NJDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1978
- Horsey v. AsherDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1983