Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Jacquelyn Bouazizi v. Hillsborough County Civil Service Board, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 20-10429 · judgment January 29, 2021


Certiorari denied · January 10, 2022
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Questions presented

  1. Should the Doctrine of Equitable Tolling be expanded to include a situation in which a pro se party previously represented by counsels, having received substandard legal advice and representation, relying solely on the notion that the hired counsels were competent and can therefore move client’s cause of action involving employment discrimination litigation on the basis of gender, age, retaliation, equal pay, FMLA claim, and race (against Respondents Hillsborough County and the County Civil Service Board) believing on the representation of previous counsels that after filing the Original Complaint, Exhibit 4, Amended Complaint, Exhibit 5, Second Amended Complaint, Exhibit 5-A, Third Amended Complaint, Exhibit 5B; hiring two attorneys who have been practicing labor law and representing to the Petitioner that this is their profession. Petitioner's lawyers Craig Berman, Erik Del E’toile, and Carl R. Hayes enormously failed by failing to comprehend all that is needed in a discrimination case, whose actions were convoluted and confusing to Judge Robert Foster and Judge Virginia Hernandez Covington which resulted to both Judges' failure to verify that Petitioner filed a FMLA Claim as opposed to the alleged Disability Claim of the Petitioner which the latter did not have.

  2. Does failure of attorneys to include in the complaints what needed to be included at the time it should have been, constitutes negligence entitling Petitioner to avail of the application of the Doctrine of Equitable Tolling? Out of filing five complaints and hiring three attorneys, yet Petitioner's attorneys failed to include what needed to be included at the time it should have been included by failing to satisfactorily plead Petitioner's cause of action. Petitioner's attorney's failed to present valid claims, failed to include Equal Pay claim and only included the same after the lapse of its statute of limitations, failed to adduce a prima facie claim, failed to allege how the law applies to the facts, failed to state a cause of action, failed to include comparison with the comparators. Craig Berman filed the original complaint on November 18, 2015 where he failed to amend the complaint as per Judge Robert Foster’s order on two occasions, while attorney Erik Del E’toile filed the two Amended Complaint on January 18, 2018 and Carl R. Hayes filed the Second Amended Complaint on February 19, 2019 as well as the Third Amended Complaint May 9, 2019.

  3. Should a pro se litigant be penalized for the misrepresentation, fraud, and incompetence manifested by her previously hired attorneys, with the fraud committed by Attorneys Todd and Zinober by adding a disability to Petitioner’s EEOC charge to later get Petitioner’s complaints against Respondents Board and County be dismissed with prejudice based on a fraudulent disability claim that they added to Petitioner EEOC charge 511-2014-01711.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Jacquelyn Bouazizi

For respondent
Stephen Mark Todd
Hillsborough County Attorney's Office

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Feb 28 2022
    Rehearing DENIED.
  2. Feb 09 2022
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/25/2022.
  3. Jan 27 2022
  4. Jan 10 2022
    Petition DENIED.
  5. Dec 22 2021
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
  6. Dec 21 2021
    Reply of petitioner Jacquelyn Bouazizi filed. (Distributed)
  7. Dec 06 2021
    Brief of respondent Hillsborough County Civil Service Board in opposition filed.
  8. Nov 29 2021
    Brief of respondent Hillsborough County in opposition filed.
  9. Nov 22 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 6, 2021, for all respondents.
  10. Nov 19 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 29, 2021 to December 6, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
  11. Sep 23 2021
    The motions to extend the time to file responses are granted and the time is extended to and including November 29, 2021, for all respondents.
  12. Sep 20 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 30, 2021 to November 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
  13. Sep 17 2021
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 30, 2021 to November 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
  14. Aug 26 2021
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 30, 2021)