No. 20-1544

Felicia Ross v. Peregrine Health Services, Inc., et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-05-05
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights counsel counsel-request district-court-dismissal due-process equal-protection pro-se-litigant procedural-due-process standing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-06-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the District Courts err by not allowing Due Process?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions Presented Did the District Courts err by not allowing Due Process? Did the District Courts err by not considering the rights of a protected citizen in the rule of law when considering procedural due process? Did the District Courts properly exercise its ruling of Due Process rule of law considering Liberty? . Did the District Courts err in not considering counsel? Why would the courts ignore the request for counsel, when in fact that was the court's reason for dismissing the claim? Under U.S.C 1915 (e) Defendants claim the case was dismissed. , Did the District Courts properly exercise an unbiased ruling, toward a pro se litigant? Did the District Courts err, in 28 U.S. Code 1654 appearance personally or by counsel? Did the District Courts err, by dismissing Ross v. Peregrine Health Services et.al and allowing Ross's rights as a citizen to be taken away by a Government Agency, (RailRoad Retirement Board)? Should asking the Districts Court for counsel, under U.S.C 1915 (d) as a pro se, and the courts give no answer, to the request and dismiss the case, is that a Violation of Procedural Due Process? . Did the District Courts respect the legal requirement that is owed to a person under Due Process Clause? Did the District Courts err when they overlooked deprivation of Life, liberty, Happiness, or Property? Did the District Courts follow equal protection under the law? Substantive due process Did the District Courts err in not allowing Ohio code 2113.01 to be considered? (Probate Court Letter). Evidence Did the District Courts err in not allowing protection from the power of the State? Should the District Courts give a single definition on what constitutes a pro se defending their “own civil rights? Did the District Courts overlook the material facts? . Did the District Courts abuse the process? By dismissing the case under1915(d). Did the District Courts of Appeals for Sixth Circuit follow procedure on appeals 2505.01 (2),(3) or 2505.02 enforce or protect (Substantial right)? Did the District Courts dismiss because of lack of standing, the plaintiff had no case, no evidence? Did the District Courts err by not allowing Due Process? Did the District Courts err by not considering the rights of a protected citizen in the rule of law when considering procedural Due Process Clause.

Docket Entries

2021-06-28
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-05-20
Waiver of right of respondents Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland Clinic South Pointe to respond filed.
2021-05-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-03-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 4, 2021)

Attorneys

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland Clinic South Pointe
Susan M. AudeyTucker Ellis LLP, Respondent
Susan M. AudeyTucker Ellis LLP, Respondent
Felicia Ross
Felicia Ross — Petitioner
Felicia Ross — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent