Richardson v. Virginia State Department Of Corrections, No. 3:2017cv00101 - Document 2 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. READ OPINION for complete details. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 02/15/2017. Copy mailed to Plaintiff.(ccol, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Richardson v. Virginia State Department Of Corrections Doc. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division FEB I 6 20!7 GREGORY A. RICHARDSON, CLERK. U.S. D1STR1CT COUR1 RICHMOND, VA Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:17CV101 v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Gregory A. Richardson, a Virginia detainee proceeding pro se submitted an action he labeled, "MOTION TO VACATE." 1.) (ECF No. By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on January 8, 2009, the Court subjected all litigation submitted by Richardson to a pref iling Richardson injunction. No. 3:07cv514 (E.D. Va. Order filed v. Dep't Va. Jan. 8, Corr., 2009} . That injunction provides: 1. Absent a bona fide emergency, the Court will only process one action at a time from Richardson . . . . If Richardson files a new action while another action is pending before the Court, the new action will be filed and summarily dismissed without prejudice. If an action is transferred or removed to this Court while another action is currently pending before the Court, the new action will be filed and summarily dismissed without prejudice. Richardson may dismiss a pending action to expedite another action that he wishes the Court to consider. Such dismissal, however, will be with prejudice if a responsive pleading or motion has been filed. 2. Richardson may not simultaneously litigate multiple challenges to his current custody in state and federal courts. See 28 u.s.c. § 2244(b}; 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b) (1) (A). Dockets.Justia.com 3. Richardson is precluded from writing on both sides of any submission. 4. All petitions for writs of habeas corpus and civil rights actions under 42 u. S. C. § 1983 must be submitted on the standardized forms, which may be obtained f ram the Clerk of Court. To the extent that Richardson wishes to pursue an action under some other statute than 28 U.S.C. § 2241, 28 U.S.C § 2254, or 42 u.s.c. § 1983, he must identify the statute that authorizes the action at top of the first page of the action and succinctly explain why that statute is applicable. s. In order to monitor Richardson's repetitious and multiplicitious litigation he must attach to each new complaint or petition a separate document entitled "motion for leave to file and certificate of compliance" which shall in separately number paragraphs: (a) Identify by style, date filed, and current status, all cases filed by him or in which he has been a plaintiff or petitioner within the one year period preceding the filing of the certificate. Richardson shall also identify in which court the case was filed; (b) Certify that the claims he wishes to present are new claims never before raised and dismissed with prejudice by any federal court and set forth why each claim could not have been raised in one of his prior federal actions; (c) For any complaint, set forth in separate subparagraphs for each of the defendants the facts that Richardson believes entitle him to relief against the defendant and the basis for his belief that such facts exist. Each subparagraph must, standing alone and without reference to other subparagraphs, exhibits, or attachments, establish that the claim against the defendant is made in good faith, and has a tenable basis in fact and is not frivolous; (d) Contain Richardson's statement under penalty of perjury that the statements made in the certificate of compliance are true. 6. Richardson's failure to comply strictly with the requirements set forth above will result in summary denial of the motion for leave to file. If Richardson 2 misrepresents any facts he will be subject to appropriate sanctions. Id. at 1-3. Richardson's injunction. submission, current action fails to comply with the For example, Richardson wrote oN both sides of his he failed to identify the statute that authorizes the action at top of the first page of the action and succinctly explain why that statute is applicable, motion for leave to file and and failed to file certificate of a compliance. Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of the Memorandum Opinion to Richardson. /s/ J?.£1> Robert E. Payne Senior United States District Judge Date: Richmond, Virginia I'>, 'U>i'( 3
]]>
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.
