Short answer. Yes. Beyond dismissing the petition for failing to comply with the fee, service, or content requirements, the Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition if the appeal is without merit, filed manifestly to delay, or raises questions too insubstantial to require consideration.
What the law says
The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof.
Rule 45, Section 5 — Dismissal or denial of petition. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the appeal is without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.
Rule 45, Section 5 — Dismissal or denial of petition. Read the full provision →
Procedural dismissal for missing requirements
Section 5 first addresses failures of form. The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof. This tracks the fee and content requirements set out in Sections 3 and 4.
Substantive denial without waiting for a response
Separately, the Supreme Court is not limited to procedural gatekeeping. The Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the appeal is without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration. This substantive screening can happen even where every fee, deadline, and content requirement was satisfied, since a technically complete petition can still be denied outright on these grounds.
Two independent gates a petition must pass
Together these give a Rule 45 petition two separate hurdles: it must be technically complete under Sections 3 and 4, and it must present a case the Supreme Court considers worth taking up on the merits. Failing either one, on the Court's own initiative, is enough to end the petition without the respondent ever being called upon to answer, since both grounds operate before the case reaches the stage of full briefing.
Why review at this stage is discretionary
A Rule 45 petition is not an appeal as a matter of right in the way an ordinary appeal to the Court of Appeals is; it asks the Supreme Court to exercise its discretion to take up questions of law. That discretionary character is what lets the Court screen petitions this early, denying those that are without merit, plainly filed for delay, or too insubstantial to warrant the Court's attention, rather than requiring every petition to proceed through a full response and decision on the merits regardless of its apparent weight.
Related provisions
- Rule 45, Section 5 — Dismissal or denial of petition
- Rule 45, Section 3 — Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service of petition
- Rule 45, Section 4 — Contents of petition