No. 20-725

Michael Ramon Ochoa v. Arthur Levine

Lower Court: Pennsylvania
Docketed: 2020-11-25
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: amendment-xi civil-rights constitutional-interpretation due-process existential-threats judicial-bias originalism pro-se-access systemic-bias systemic-justice
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-02-19
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does Judge Colville's elevation to the federal bench or any other events during the pendency of this case lend urgency to the problem of Thrasymachus?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. The questions posed in the preceding course of appellate actions should be . regarded as if entered here in their entirety.! : 2. Does Judge Colville’s elevation to the federal bench or any other events during the pendency of this case lend urgency to the problem of Thrasymachus?? 3. Does Judge Colville’s own account of the different standards he used in applying Pa.R.C.P. 233.1 in this case and that of Ms. Jacquelyn B. N’Jai reflect systemic bias? . 4A. Do this Court’s 03-19-20 and 04-15-20 Orders in response to the global pandemic . demonstrate that its onerous paper filing, formatting and fees serve no necessary _ purpose, other than to limit pro se access to justice? , ; _ 5. Does this, too, reflect systemic bias? 6. Whose version of the facts is more “reflective of reality” de jure? de facto? 7. Does U.S. Constitution Amendment XI prevent this Court from learning anything from the recent collapse of the Pa. Supreme Court? . 8 Are rigid versions of Originalism susceptible to reductio ad absurdum? 9. Does this Court have any role in recognizing existential threats to the Republic? | a 10. | Have we reached the “...burn the records and bill the victims” stage of our beloved United States of America? . 11. Could all of this damage be mitigated simply by granting review? ; 1 See attached Exhibit H. Questions or Anoria or CE% BF %CF%81%CE% BI%CE%BI%CE%83? source=swp_share ) 2 See Ronna Burger: BF %CF%81 H/CE“AF%CE% source=swp_share ii . LISTS OF PARTIES AND

Docket Entries

2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-01-06
Waiver of right of respondents Arthur Levine, MD, University of Pittsburgh Board of Trustees, et al. to respond filed.
2020-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent Chairman of the Board of Trustees Preston G. Athey, Headmaster; Zachary Lehman and the Hill School to respond filed.
2020-10-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 28, 2020)

Attorneys

Arthur Levine, MD, University of Pittsburgh Board of Trustees, et al.
Steven L. EttingerDickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., Respondent
Steven L. EttingerDickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., Respondent
Chairman of the Board of Trustees Preston G. Athey, Headmaster; Zachary Lehman and the Hill School
Shane HaselbarthMarshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Respondent
Shane HaselbarthMarshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Respondent
Michael R. Ochoa
Michael Ramon Ochoa — Petitioner
Michael Ramon Ochoa — Petitioner