Emmanuel Folly v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, et al.
Arbitration SocialSecurity DueProcess
1. Whether systemic barriers preventing a pro se litigant from securing counsel, where stigma
impedes representation, constitute "extraordinary circumstances " justifying equitable tolling of
42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims.
2. Whether due process is violated when a government employer relies on biased arbitration
findings that contradict a judicial acquittal, thereby depriving an acquitted employee of a
protected property interest in reinstatement.
Whether systemic barriers preventing a pro se litigant from securing counsel constitute 'extraordinary circumstances' justifying equitable tolling of civil rights claims, and whether due process is violated when a government employer relies on biased arbitration findings that contradict a judicial acquittal