Richardson v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al, No. 3:2017cv00607 - Document 3 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 10/13/2017. Copy mailed to plaintiff. (tjoh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Richardson v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al Doc. 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OCX 16 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division CLERK. U S DISTRICT COURT PICi-iMOrcD. VA GREGORY RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. V. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, 3:17CV607 et al. , Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Gregory Richardson, submitted amassed this an a Virginia prisoner proceeding pro se, action under extensive litigation. See No. 3:07CV514, ECF 28 U.S.C. history 49, at 2254. Richardson has of frivolous v. Richardson No. § Va. 1-7 and Dep't (E.D. Va. abusive of Dec. Corr., 9, 2008). Thus, Richardson's litigation in this district is subject to the following pre-filing injunction: 1. Absent a bona fide emergency, only process Richardson If is be files pending before filed prejudice. action at a time from .... Richardson action will one the Court will and a new the action Court, summarily while the another new action dismissed without 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. dismiss a pending action to expedite that he wishes the Court to consider. however, will be with prejudice Richardson may another action Such dismissal, 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. S^ 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 from 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. 5. 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 compliance" to which file shall and in certificate separately of 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 relief his that Richardson believes against belief subparagraph the defendant that such must, standing entitle him to and facts the basis exist. alone for Each 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 penalty of perjury that the statements under 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 misrepresents any facts sanctions. leave to file. he will be subject If Richardson to appropriate Richardson v. 1-3 Va. (E.D. Va. Jan. Dep't of Corr., 8, Richardson's requirements set No. 3:07CV514, and newest forth filing fails to in the pre-filing certificate of compliance." comply such to an file the action. action on the Accordingly, at the First, "motion for leave to Second, standardized the with injunction. invokes the Court's jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. failed 49, 2009). Richardson's action is not accompanied by a file ECF No. action although § 1983, form will be for he he has filing dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Date: Robert E. /s/ Payne Richmond, Virginia Senior United States District Judge Opinion to Richardson. It is so ORDERED.
]]>
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.
