No. 20-6236

Fuad Ndibalema v. Mark A. Levine

Lower Court: Vermont
Docketed: 2020-11-05
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: adequate-remedy civil-procedure constitutional-law declaratory-relief due-process fourteenth-amendment fourth-amendment legal-remedy property-rights
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-12-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Existence of another Adequate Remedy does preclude a Judgment for Declaratory Relief

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Whether the Existence of another Adequate Remedy does preclude a Judgment for Declaratory Relief given the Facts and Law on the Record, whether the Vermont’s court of last ' resort has decided on important question of Law that has not been, but should be, settled by the US Supreme Court? 2) Do rasping, non-statutory restricted conditions inflicted upon Petitioner’s business constitute a deprivation of property without due process of Law under the Fourteenth Amendment? 3) Does weekly Petitioner’s business data reporting as part of conditions requirement to Commissioner for the purpose of obtaining information constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment? ii 4

Docket Entries

2020-12-07
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-11-10
Waiver of right of respondent Mark A. Levine to respond filed.
2020-10-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2020)

Attorneys

Fuad Ndibalema
Fuad Ndibalema — Petitioner
Mark A. Levine
Benjamin Daniel BattlesOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent