Reginald Dunahue, Appellant v. Wendy Kelley

Summary

Justice Hart dissented from the dismissal of Dunahue’s appeal, arguing that the court should first rule on his motion to accept a nonconforming brief rather than dismiss an appeal based on a brief that had not been accepted or circulated for review. She reasoned that the filing requirements were substantially satisfied or curable and that dismissal denied an incarcerated pro se appellant access to the courts, due process, and equal protection. The dissent maintains that Dunahue should have been given an opportunity to submit a conforming brief.