WILLIAMS
v.
LEE (JACKSON COUNTY)
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Federal courts do not have jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus to compel state officials to perform their duties.
Petitioner, a state prisoner, sought a writ of mandamus from the federal district court to compel Florida's Secretary of State to provide copies of oa…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Public Records Act cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion to Sanction (Doc. 1) which is construed as a petition for the writ of mandamus.1 Petitioner, a Florida prisoner, petitions the Court to direct Respondent (Florida’s Secretary of State) to comply with his request to provide him copies of oaths of office of several state officials. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to copies of the oaths of office under Florida’s public records law. Although United States district courts have jurisdiction in actions in the nature of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361 to compel United States officials to perform their duties,2 United States courts do not have jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus to direct state officials in the performance of their duties. Lamar v. 118th Judicial Dist. Court, 440 F. 2d 383 (5th Cir. 1971) (concluding that federal courts have no general power to issue writs of mandamus
to compel state judicial officers to perform their duties);> Campbell v. Gersten, 394 F. App’x 654 (11th Cir. 2010) (unpublished) (“The district court also lacked authority to issue a writ of mandamus to compel the state court and its officers to reinstate his motions to vacate and consider those motions on the merits.”) (citing Lamar, 440 F. 2d at 384). Because Respondent is a state official, this Court has no mandamus jurisdiction over her. Consequently, this Court lacks authority to grant the relief requested by Petitioner. Accordingly, Petitioner’s construed motion for the writ of mandamus (Doc. 1) is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment against Petitioner and close this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on October 30, 2020.
Chak Pre Awards Ho TO pl ell Charlene Edwards Honeywell United States District Judge Copies to: Petitioner, pro se
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bonner v. City OF Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981)
- United States v. Denson, 603 F.2d 1143 (5th Cir. 1979)
- Lamar v. 118TH Jud. Dist. Court OF Tex., 440 F.2d 383 (5th Cir. 1971)