Courts & Justice Law Journal

Advocatus Iustitia Aeque

1 Cts. & Just. L.J.

Vol. 1       Vol. 2

ARTICLE | VOLUME 2, ISSUE 2

A Game of Telephone: Why §1972 Should Not Apply to Pro Se Litigants

by Pierce Schultz, University of Florida Levin College of Law 2021

2 Cts. & Just. L.J. 215 (2020)

Not much has been written about the 30-year old circuit split over whether 28 U.S.C. § 1927 applies to pro se litigants. The little that has been written about it has seemingly missed that the Ninth Circuit’s rule is built on a faulty foundation. Specifically, I argue that the case establishing the rule in the Ninth Circuit erroneously relied on a previous case that it misinterpreted.

 

I further argue that the source of this misinterpretation was an inaccurate headnote. This raises concerns about the use of headnotes more generally. Attorneys cite headnotes more frequently than you would think, and courts have been misled by headnotes several times. Therefore, to prevent similar occurrences in the future, I propose that publishers add a warning not to rely on the case’s headnotes.

/ Spring 2020 / C&JLJ                                                                            

© 2020 by Everyday Evidence

Daniel@everydayevidence.og

  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon