Wilmer v. Delaware Supreme Court et al, No. 1:2013cv01059 - Document 8 (D. Del. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re 1 PETITION for Writ of Mandamus, and 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 10/1/2013. (nms)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GERALD A. WILMER, Petitioner, v. C.A. No. 13-1059-RGA DELAWARE SUPREME COURT, et al, Respondents. MEMORANDUM Whereas, Gerald A. Wilmer ("Wilmer") has filed a "motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis" (D.I. 3) and a petition for writ of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361. (D.I. 1) Wilmer's mandamus petition asks this court to compel the Delaware Supreme Court to respond to his certification of law request (related to his state Rule 61 proceeding) that it refused to act upon. (D. I. 1 at 5) However, this court cannot compel the Delaware Supreme Court to certify Wilmer's question(s) of law, because 28 U.S.C. § 1361 does not grant this court mandamus jurisdiction over a Delaware state court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (the district courts have "original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff."); In re Wolenski, 324 F.2d 309 (3d Cir. 1963)(explaining that the district court "had no jurisdiction" to "issue a writ of mandamus compelling action by a state official"). As such, the court will enter a separate order dismissing the instant mandamus petition for lack of jurisdiction. DATE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
