Sellner v. Panagoulis

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the court was not aware “of any right afforded by either the Constitution or laws of the United States to private persons to compel a state to prosecute criminal activity”
• finding that the plaintiff’s “[§] 1985 claims fail because he has alleged the existence of conspiracies in only the most conclusory way and has not supported his allegations of conspiracy by reference to material facts.”
• finding that the plaintiff's section “1985 claims fail because he has alleged the existence of conspiracies in only the most conclusory way and has not supported his allegations of conspiracy by reference to material facts.”
• finding that the plaintiff’s section “1985 claims fail because he has alleged the existence of conspiracies in only the most conclusory way and has not supported his allegations of conspiracy by reference to material facts.”
• “[S]ection 1986. . . ‘merely gives a remedy for misprision of a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985.’”
• “[S]ection 1986. . . ‘merely gives a remedy for misprision of a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).