Unpublished Dispositionjohn Paul Powers, Plaintiff,david Allen Headlee, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Richard Seiter, Defendant-appellee, 843 F.2d 1392 (6th Cir. 1988)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 843 F.2d 1392 (6th Cir. 1988) March 31, 1988

Before LIVELY, Chief Judge, RALPH B. GUY, Jr., Circuit Judge, and AVERN COHN, District Judge.* 

ORDER

Plaintiff appeals the district court's judgment dismissing his civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appeal has been referred to a panel pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the certified record and the parties' briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not necessary. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).

Plaintiff claimed that the defendant's policy setting the standard for indigency based on the consent decree in Cox v. Patterson, No. C-2-75-661 (S.D. Ohio E.D. June 28, 1978), violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. On appeal he also asserts that the policy violates his constitutional rights under the first and sixth amendments and impedes his right of access to the courts.

Upon consideration, we conclude that plaintiff's first and sixth amendment arguments are not reviewable on appeal in the first instance. See Brown v. Marshall, 704 F.2d 333 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 835 (1983). We also conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint for the reasons stated by it. We therefore affirm the district court's judgment. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

 *

The Honorable Avern Coh, U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.