Legal Document

406 U.S. 337 92 Supreme Court Reporter 1598 32 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 107 Harold Engene HUFFMAN, Petitioner,v.Faye I. BOERSEN. Number 71—5097. Argued April 19, 1972. Decided May 15, Leo Eisenstatt, Omaha, Neb., for petitioner. Vincent L. Dowding, Grand Island, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 We granted certiorari to review the constitutionality of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25—1914 (1964)1 under which Nebraska dismissed this indigent petitioner's appeal his failure deposit $75 cash or bond security costs required appellants by statute. 404 990, 540, 30 541 (1971). The judgment appealed from annulled marriage respondent and counter suit claiming paternity custody a child born After our grant certiorari, enacted Legislative Bill 1120 providing, among other things, that courts 'shall authorize . (an) without prepayment security, person who makes an affidavit he is unable give .,' except '(a)n may not be taken in forma pauperis if trial court certifies writing it good faith.' Counsel both parties were opinion on oral argument here new statute applicable instant case. also conceded issue has merit.2 Accordingly, vacated cause remanded reconsideration light supervening 2 It so ordered. 3 Judgment remanded. 4 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. 5 While & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions agree either reversing below vacating remanding, do somewhat different grounds. 6 This case clearly controlled Boddie versus Connecticut, 401 371, 91 780, 28 113. involves, divorce, but annulment claim concerning child. principles announced are therefore no matter how closely confined.1 7 What about recently been its business ours. before us cannot their agreement make applicable. Only can so, we direct reconsider statute.2 sovereign own right connection with local law matters. contains guiding federal principle alone should control disposition case.3 'On any district appellant shall, within one month next after rendition decree sought reversed, modified, file undertaking sum seventy-five dollars approved clerk court, conditioned shall pay all adjudged against him Court; or, lieu thereof, said at least same purpose ..' 'Q. You told today you concede determination question was insufficient, invalid think word used. 'Mr. Dowding. Yes, I'm willing (petitioner) did have day issue. And could say remand. Yes. So stipulate.' Tr. Oral Arg. 40. share view Black, however, that: '(T)he decision Connecticut safely rest only crucial foundation—that civil each belong people country denied access those courts, appeal, because fee, finance bond, risk penalty, afford hire attorney. foundation rests forbids denial indigent's cases merely too poor costs. Once unhampered judicial process established, diluted unless litigant opportunity assert obtain errors committed trial.' Meltzer G. Buck LeCraw Co., 402 954, 955—956, 958, 1624, 1625, 1626, 29 124 (opinion J.). Some procedures appellate certify questions state supreme court. Florida one. See Diffenderfer Central Baptist Church, 412, 415, 574, 576, 567 (Douglas, J., dissenting). such procedure. possible will opportunity, despite remand, rule applicability provides In system, 'good faith' 'been defined as requirement present nonfrivolous review.' Cruz Hauck, 59, 62, 313, 315, 217 concurring). Here, urges strenuously indeed frivolous. counsel stipulate there merit issue, effect stipulation views judge, record believing assertions 'wholly merit,' App. 49, highly speculative. Should disallowed court's certification frivolous, would hold petitioner had equal protection laws. supra.

Classification Label: 1