No. 23-5961

Martin Robinson v. Ohio Civil Rights Commission, et al.

Lower Court: Ohio
Docketed: 2023-11-06
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (3)IFP
Tags: accountability civil-procedure civil-rights court-accountability due-process judicial-misconduct jurisdictional-transfer pro-se-litigation public-officials standing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference: 2024-02-16 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is there a lack of accountability for public officials' corrupt acts, lying, stealing, and fraud?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Original Complaint in the Supreme Court of Ohio, ‘ The right to an effective judicial process. Why are the courts ignoring my claims of wrongful imprisonment? ; Why have the corrupt acts, lying, stealing, fraud of public officials been allowed to carry on for the past years, without any investigation. Is there a lack of accountability? Where are the people in the positions being paid to investigate these allegations? Why are the Justices that are being paid to be impartial, covering for public officials committing bad acts (criminal acts if by a civilian)? Why does the S.C.O. intentionally mail inter-departmental decisions untimely in order to prevent the timely filing of a ten day reconsideration? Why is it ignored when inmates have repeatedly brought it to the courts’ attention? How do | get this court to act? Who is filling in for Justice Clarence Thomas while he is busy traveling lavishly all around the world? Is he the reason this court refuses to hear my cases? in the Supreme Court of Ohio, ali of the attorneys for respondents did not sign the answer which violated Civ.R.11, failing to sign the complaint as required by Civ.R.11. Should the SCO have transferred jurisdiction to OH Court of Claims or U.S. District Court? Or simply granted the complaint? The SCO failed to hold a hearing prior to dismissal of the original action.

Docket Entries

2024-02-20
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2024-01-24
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-05
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2023-12-11
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2023-12-01
Rescheduled.
2023-12-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2023.
2023-11-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2023.
2023-11-07
Waiver of right of respondent Ohio Civil Rights Commission, et al. to respond filed.
2023-10-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 6, 2023)

Attorneys

Martin Robinson
Martin Robinson — Petitioner
Ohio Civil Rights Commission, et al.
Michael Jason HendershotOhio Attorney General's Office, Respondent