affirming sanctions in the amount of $2,000 against a pro se plaintiff who unnecessarily multiplied the cost of litigation without a good-faith factual basis for his claims
Summary of this case from Hawthorne-Burdine v. Oakland Univ.98-2265.
March 3, 2000.
E.D.Mich.
This is an unpublished opinion.
Affirmed.
affirming sanctions in the amount of $2,000 against a pro se plaintiff who unnecessarily multiplied the cost of litigation without a good-faith factual basis for his claims
Summary of this case from Hawthorne-Burdine v. Oakland Univ.rejecting appellant's contention that 28 U.S.C. § 1782 did not give district court jurisdiction to honor letters rogatory
Summary of this case from In re United Company Rusal, PLC v. Trafigura A.G.describing the two-year deadline for filing administrative claims as jurisdictional
Summary of this case from Jackson v. United Statesdescribing the two-year deadline for filing administrative claims as jurisdictional
Summary of this case from Jackson v. United StatesFull title:U.S. v. Devine
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Date published: Mar 3, 2000
However, courts and commentators applying Rule 9(a)(2) have not done so as narrowly as Plaintiff suggests. In…
Zimmerman v. Board of Wabaunsee County Comm'rsAccordingly, we can find no substantial impairment. See also Schenck v. City of Hudson, 997 F. Supp. 902, 907…