No. 21-7001
Adam J. Tenser v. Beth Silverman, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: attorney-representation civil-rights due-process fairness judicial-interpretation legal-solicitude liberal-construction pro-se self-representation slander standing
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity DueProcess
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-04-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court's articulation of the pro se liberal construction rule in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 529 (1972) implies a general withdrawal of the pro solicitude from lawyers representing themselves in civil-rights suits
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether this Court’s articulation of the pro se liberal construction rule in Haines ; v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 529 (1972) implies a general withdrawal of the pro | solicitude from lawyers representing themselves in civil rights suits. : | 1 1 i ! [ i
Docket Entries
2022-04-04
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2022.
2022-03-10
Waiver of right of respondent Beth Silverman, et al. to respond filed.
2022-01-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 28, 2022)
Attorneys
Adam J. Tenser
Adam J. Tenser — Petitioner
Beth Silverman, et al.
Christian E. Foy Magy — Collins & Collins, LLP, Respondent