In Re Lonzy Oliver. Appeal of Lonzy Oliver

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that a remand was warranted where the district court failed to provide litigant with notice and an op portunity to oppose an order restricting future filings
• concluding that the district court has the power to issue such injunctive pre-filing orders in appropriate cases, but remanding so that the district court could provide plaintiff with notice and an opportunity to be heard in opposition to the order
• concluding that the district court has the power to issue such injunctive pre-filing orders in appropriate cases, but remanding so that the district court could provide plaintiff with notice and an opportunity to be heard in opposition to the order
• noting that the All Writs Act may support an order barring filing by plaintiffs who engage in a “continuous pattern of groundless and vexatious litigation”
• finding that the record appeared to justify a prefiling injunction against a pro se plaintiff, provided that the plaintiff had the opportunity to oppose the injunction before it was entered
• noting that “[a]ccess to the courts is a fundamental tenet of our judicial system; legitimate claims should receive a full and fair hearing no matter how litigious the plaintiff may be”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).