No. 24-467
Christopher Hadsell v. Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, et al.
Tags: access-to-courts constitutional-challenge due-process fundamental-rights state-interest vexatious-litigant
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
FirstAmendment DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2025-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether California's Vexatious Litigant Law is unconstitutional on facial and as-applied grounds due to lack of narrow tailoring and compelling state interest
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Is California’s Vexatious Litigant Law (“CA VL Law”, Cal. Code Civ. Proc.! §§391-391.8) unconstitutional facially because it is not narrowly tailored or it does not involve an actual, compelling state interest? 2. Is CA VL Law unconstitutional as applied? 1 Subsequent references to the Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. will be designated “CCP”. ii II.
Docket Entries
2025-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2024-12-14
Supplemental brief of petitioner Christopher Hadsell filed. (Distributed)
2024-12-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-10-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 25, 2024)