Opinion
APRIL 1, 2002
No. D-2272 IN RE DISBARMENT OF PEES. Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 534 U.S. 806.]
No. 01M43 DENNIS v. MEADOWS, WARDEN; and
No. 01M44 GENTERY v. ROE, WARDEN. Motions to direct the Clerk to file petitions for writs of certiorari out-of-time denied.
No. 01-309 HOPE v. PELZER ET AL. C.A. 11th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 534 U.S. 1073 and 1120.] Motion of Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
No. 01-651 JPMORGAN CHASE MANHATTAN BANK v. TRAFFIC STREAM (BVI) INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. C.A.2d Cir. [Certiorari granted sum nom. Chase Manhattan Bank v. Traffic Stream (BVI) Infrastructure Ltd., 534 U.S. 1074.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
No. 01-679 GONZAGA UNIVERSITY ET AL. v. DOE. Sup.Ct. Wash. [Certiorari granted, 534 U.S. 1103.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
No. 01-682 BARNES, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, ET AL. v. GORMAN. C.A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 534 U.S. 1103.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
No. 01-419 CITY OF COLUMBUS ET AL. v. OURS GARAGE AND WRECKER SERVICE, INC., ET AL. C.A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 534 U.S. 1073.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is granted. Motion of Kansas, et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument denied.
No. 01-8831 IN RE THURSTON. Petition for a writ of habeas corpus denied.
No. 01-8880 IN RE THOMPSON. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U.S. 1 (1992) ( per curiam). Justice Stevens dissents. See id., at 4, and cases cited therein.