No. 23-7007

Howard T. Tyson, Sr. v. Kris Y. Lee, et al.

Lower Court: District of Columbia
Docketed: 2024-03-15
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 7th-amendment civil-procedure constitutional-rights due-process evidence-standard judicial-orders judicial-procedure motion-to-dismiss pleadings pro-se-appellant standing
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2024-05-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)

why-do-courts-fail-to-follow-supreme-court-opinions-on-pro-se-motions-to-dismiss

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. WHY DOES THE COURTS FAIL TO FOLLOW OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT WICH SAYS. WHEN A PRO SE APPELLANT ARE FACES WITH A MOTION TO DISMISS. IT Is APPROPRIATE FOR THE COURT TO CONCIDER MATERIAL OUTSIDE OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE EXTENT. TO SEE IF THEY ARE CONSISTANT WITH ALL ALLIGATIONS? 2. WHY DOESN’T A CIVIL CASE FILED WITH AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF FACTUAL EVIDENSE. THE EVIDENSE BEING IMPECABLE. SELDOM IS ALLOWED A TRIAL BY JURY AS THE 7™ AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION STATES? 3. WHY IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH JUDGES FAILING TO SIGN THEIR ORDERS WHICH THE SIGNATURE IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT. THERE ISA HUGE PROBLEM IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA?

Docket Entries

2024-05-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2024.
2024-03-26
Waiver of right of respondent Kris Y. Lee to respond filed.
2024-03-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 15, 2024)

Attorneys

Howard T. Tyson
Howard T. Tyson Sr. — Petitioner
Howard T. Tyson Sr. — Petitioner
Kris Y. Lee
David Drake HudginsHudgins Law Firm, Respondent
David Drake HudginsHudgins Law Firm, Respondent