No. 21-6381
Russell Tinsley v. Merrill Main, et al.
IFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process first-amendment free-speech freedom-of-speech qualified-immunity retaliation standing
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment DueProcess
FirstAmendment DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-01-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the New Jersey United States District Court denied Mr. Tinsley's First Amendment retaliation claim
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED | POINT 1 WHEATHER THE NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DENIED MR. — | TINSLEY’S HIS FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION (RETALIATION CLAIM AGAINST MERRILL MAIN), WHO PUNISHED MR. TINSLEY FOR HIS PUBLISHED BOOK “CIVILLY COMMITTED” AND DENIED HIS POINT 2 7 WHETHER THE LOWER COURTS ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION FOR | DENYING MR. TINSLEY’S OF HIS FIRST AMENDMENT CLAIM OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH, BASED ON HIS PUBLISHED BOOK AND TO DENIED HIM HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO TREATMENT AS PUNISHMENT. .scecees
Docket Entries
2022-01-24
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/21/2022.
2021-10-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 23, 2021)
Attorneys
Russell Tinsley
Russell Tinsley — Petitioner