# Theodis Brown v. Herald Co., Inc., Etc

> Supreme Court of the United States · October 31, 1983 · 464 U.S. 928

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429456

## Case

- **Full name:** Brown v. Herald Co., Inc., Dba Globe Democrat Publishing Co.; Alexander v. Texas Et Al.; Cross v. Secretary of State; Eno Et Al. v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Et Al.; Linfield v. Board of Higher Education of the City of New York; Miller v. Pierce, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** October 31, 1983
- **Citations:** 464 U.S. 928; 52 U.S.L.W. 3338; 104 S. Ct. 331; 78 L. Ed. 2d 303; 1983 U.S. LEXIS 2065
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Stevens
- **Judges:** Brennan, Stevens, Marshall, Blackmun
- **Cited by:** 290 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429456

## Opinion text

Justice Stevens,
dissenting.
Although I agree with Justice Brennan that we should simply deny unmeritorious certiorari petitions without scrutinizing the petitioner’s right to proceed informa pauperis, I would not grant any such petition without making sure that the petitioner is unable to pay the required costs. If such examination disclosed the kind of disrespect for our rules that has motivated the Court’s unusual action in these cases, I would deny the petition even if it would otherwise have merited review. That would remove any incentive a petitioner might otherwise have to seek in forma pauperis status although ineligible for such status, without requiring the Court to assume the burden of examining every motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. In borderline cases the petitioner should, of course, be given an opportunity to pay the required costs before final action is taken on his application. I see no purpose, however, in insisting that these petitioners — none of whom is represented by counsel who could advise them that their petitions stand no chance of being granted — pay a fee for the privilege of having their petitions denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9429456. Public record. Not legal advice.