No. 19-7550
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure due-process federal-courts florida jurisdictional-dispute legal-challenge south-carolina standing state-courts subject-matter-jurisdiction supreme-court-jurisdiction writ-of-mandamus writ-of-prohibition
Key Terms:
DueProcess Patent
DueProcess Patent
Latest Conference:
2020-03-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a writ of prohibition or mandamus is warranted
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a writ of prohibition is warranted to confine the unlawful exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over Pamela Lee vs. Alexander Guice, Case No. 2006-DR26-0536, and all other related cases, by the South Carolina Supreme Court, and all Lower Courts of that State, and the State of Florida. : 2. Whether a writ of mandamus is warranted to compel the SC Supreme Court to take notice of and answer the subject matter jurisdictional questions of law presented prior to exercising any further jurisdiction in this matter. i
Docket Entries
2020-03-30
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/27/2020.
2020-03-04
Waiver of right of respondents Joan B. Meacham, Director, SC Dept. of Social Services to respond filed.
2020-02-26
Waiver of right of respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services to respond filed.
2020-01-22
Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 6, 2020)
Attorneys
Joan B. Meacham, Director, SC Dept. of Social Services
James Emory Smith Jr. — SC Attorney General's Office, Respondent
James Emory Smith Jr. — SC Attorney General's Office, Respondent
South Carolina Department of Social Services
G. Mile Gordon — South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent
G. Mile Gordon — South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent