No. 20-8041

Douglas E. Kampfer v. Richard Argotsinger, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2021-05-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: abuse-of-discretion civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process oath-of-office pro-se pro-se-plaintiff property-interest
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is an oath of office a valid contract under the laws and constitution?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.) (Is a OATH OF OFFICE a valid Contract under the Laws and Rules of this United States and the Constitution??? 2.) Does the taking of a OATH OF OFFICE, provide the taker a valid property interest under the Due Process Substanive Clause of the Constitution of the United States 2? 3.) Did the Lower Courts ABUSE OF DISCRETION by not considering Pro Se Plaintiff's [FACTS] that, he was allowed to begin ~ work and continue to work with out signing any other documents other then the OATH OF OFFICE 272 4.) Did the Appellate Court error in concluding, that Pro se Plaintiff Kampfer had no property interest, fundamentak or otherwise in the DCO position 27272? , e lage ยง โ€˜ . 4 ~โ€œ .

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-11
Waiver of right of respondent Richard Argotsinger, et al. to respond filed.
2021-04-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 16, 2021)

Attorneys

Douglas Kampfer
Douglas E. Kampfer — Petitioner
Douglas E. Kampfer — Petitioner
Richard Argotsinger, et al.
Gregg Tyler JohnsonJohnson & Laws, LLC, Respondent
Gregg Tyler JohnsonJohnson & Laws, LLC, Respondent