Unpublished Dispositionthurman Jerome Hamlin, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Governor, Commonwealth of Kentucky; United States Ofamerica, Usa Constitution; President Ronald W.reagan, Defendants-appellees, 899 F.2d 14 (6th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 899 F.2d 14 (6th Cir. 1990) April 6, 1990

Before KENNEDY and NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judges, and ROBERT E. DeMASCIO, Senior District Judge.* 

ORDER

This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record and the briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).

Thurman Jerome Hamlin, a Kentucky citizen, appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his complaint on the ground of lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Hamlin's complaint asserted that laws which permit the revocation of drivers' licenses and the towing of abandoned automobiles and which allow only attorneys to run for election as judges violate the Constitution.

Upon consideration, we conclude that this case was properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331; Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974). Moreover, we conclude that the frivolous and unreasonable nature of this appeal warrants the imposition of double costs under Fed. R. App. P. 38. The appellees are therefore directed to submit a bill of costs within fourteen days of the date of this order.

The district court's order is affirmed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

 *

The Honorable Robert E. DeMascio, Senior 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.