# Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals

> Supreme Court of the United States · November 2, 1992 · 506 U.S. 1

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9432692

## Case

- **Full name:** MARTIN v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** November 2, 1992
- **Citations:** 506 U.S. 1; 113 S. Ct. 397; 121 L. Ed. 2d 305; 1992 U.S. LEXIS 6805
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Stevens
- **Judges:** Blackmun, Stevens
- **Cited by:** 756 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/9432692

## Opinion text

Justice Stevens,
with whom Justice Blackmun joins,
dissenting.
In my opinion the judicial resources of the Court could be used more effectively by simply denying Martin’s petitions than by drafting, entering, and policing the order the Court enters today. The theoretical administrative benefit the Court may derive from an order of this kind is far outweighed by the shadow it casts on the great tradition of open access that characterized the Court’s history prior to its unprecedented decisions in In re McDonald, 489 U. S. 180 (1989) (per curiam), and In re Sindram, 498 U. S. 177 (1991) (per curiam). I continue to adhere to the views expressed in the dissenting opinions filed in those cases, and in the dissenting opinion I filed in Zatko v. California, 502 U. S. 16, 18 (1991) (per curiam). See also Talamini v. Allstate Ins. Co., 470 U. S. 1067 (1985), appeal dism’d (Stevens, J., concurring).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9432692. Public record. Not legal advice.