(Download) "Timson v. Wright" by United States Court Of Appeals For The Sixth Circuit * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Timson v. Wright
- Author : United States Court Of Appeals For The Sixth Circuit
- Release Date : January 23, 1976
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 50 KB
Description
Plaintiff-appellant, a self-styled concerned citizen and critic who often has litigated to expose and correct certain corrupt individuals and practices in the [Franklin County, Ohio] courts and constabulatory, instituted the instant civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §Â§ 1983, 1985, against a Franklin County common pleas judge (defendant-appellee Wright), a Franklin County assistant prosecutor (defendant-appellee Romanoff), the common pleas' chief probation officer (defendant-appellee Smith), and the attorney-in-fact for the bonding company of the three officials (defendant-appellee Hucle). Appellant claimed that the three defendant-appellee officials conspired to and did under color of state law deprive him of various constitutional rights (freedom of speech and association, right to counsel, due process, equal protection) by, inter alia, falsely prosecuting him, discriminatorily requiring him to report to probation officials daily, and attempting to coerce him to produce the records of A Concerned Citizen, Inc. Being fully at issue, this appeal was placed on the calendar for hearing on the merits on a day certain, and the parties were notified of such setting. Pursuant to that notice, counsel for the defendants-appellees responded when the case was called for oral argument, but there was no response by or on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant. The case was thereupon passed, and was again called at the termination of arguments of all of the other cases scheduled for hearing on that date. When there was again no response either by or on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant, the Presiding Judge announced that the case would be regarded as having been submitted on the record on appeal and on the briefs of the parties, and it has been so considered. This failure to respond remains unexplained.