No. 18-5695
Robert Wayne Annabel, II v. Michigan Department of Corrections, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: ada amendment-opportunity civil-procedure civil-rights conspiracy deliberate-indifference due-process plra plra-dismissal prisoner-litigation prisoner-rights rehabilitation-act res-judicata retaliation sua-sponte
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2018-10-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sixth Circuit's interpretation of the PLRA's dismissal procedures denies a fair and adequate opportunity to object or amend the complaint
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. : QUESTIONS «+ PRESENTED: JT. “The Sixth Cirewit is alone an its PLRA interpretation that a sua sponte dismissal Foc Foailuce to state ® claim at screening no longer affords a "EM and Fate opportunity” to object or amend the complaint but that res Judicata appiies, TI, Did the Farmer Facts combined with the new Facts state wiable claims For retallation, conspiracy, dellbenate Indifference, Rico, RehabiWitotion Act and ADA? (2)
Docket Entries
2018-10-29
Petition DENIED.
2018-10-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/26/2018.
2018-09-24
Waiver of right of respondents Limited appearance for Christopher King, Un Zwiker, Sgt Dennis Grandy, Unk Scott, Unk Berrington, Unk Bennett, Unk Burns, Unk Eyer, D Christiansen, James Apol, Unk Kronk to respond filed.
2018-06-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 21, 2018)
Attorneys
Limited appearance for Christopher King, Un Zwiker, Sgt Dennis Grandy, Unk Scott, Unk Berrington, Unk Bennett, Unk Burns, Unk Eyer, D Christiansen, James Apol, Unk Kronk
Aaron David Lindstrom — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent
Aaron David Lindstrom — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent