No. 24-6779

Daniel E. Hall v. X Corp., fka Twitter, Inc.

Lower Court: First Circuit
Docketed: 2025-03-17
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: court-integrity fraud-upon-court judicial-procedure legal-remedy local-rule rule-60
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess FirstAmendment
Latest Conference: 2025-11-14 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

How does the Supreme Court define and address instances of fraud upon the court, the required duty to apply Local Rule 83.1(a), the required procedure of voiding proceedings under Rule 60(b)(4) or (6) and Rule 60(d) and what remedies are available to ensure justice is served when such fraud is identified?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : I I QUESTIONS "How does the Supreme Court define and address instances of fraud upon the court, the required duty to apply Local Rule 83.1(a), the required procedure of voiding proceedings under Rule 60(b)(4) or (6) and Rule 60(d) and what remedies are available to ensure justice is served when such fraud is identified?"1. 2. "What mechanisms does the Supreme Court have to address instances where a judge creates procedural rules that disproportionately favor one party, and how does this influence the principle of impartiality in the judicial system?" "What are the implications when a Circuit Court issues a ruling that does not adhere to its own circuit's precedents or Supreme Court precedents and how does this affect the uniformity and predictability of the law?"3. "How does the Supreme Court evaluate cases where improper legal standards are applied, and what are the implications for the rule of law and the consistency of judicial decisions?"4. "What factors does the Supreme Court consider when determining whether a lower court has improperly failed to apply jurisdiction, and how does this impact the validity of judicial proceedings?"5. "What standards does the Supreme Court apply when considering a writ of certiorari to compel a judge to recuse themselves as proscribed by 28 U.S.C. § 455 and § 144, and how does this impact the integrity of judicial proceedings?"6. "In what circumstances must a court exercise its authority to declare a legislative act unconstitutional, particularly when such act contradicts established constitutional principles?"7. I.

Docket Entries

2025-11-17
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2025-10-29
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/14/2025.
2025-06-26
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2025-04-21
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.
2025-04-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2025.
2025-03-31
Waiver of X Corp., fka Twitter of right to respond submitted.
2025-03-31
Waiver of right of respondent X Corp., fka Twitter to respond filed.
2024-10-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 16, 2025)

Attorneys

Daniel E. Hall
Daniel E. Hall — Petitioner
Daniel E. Hall — Petitioner
X Corp., fka Twitter
Kenneth Michael Trujillo-JamisonWillenken LLP, Respondent
Kenneth Michael Trujillo-JamisonWillenken LLP, Respondent