Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

Frank FINLEY, Appellant, v. Elinor CHANDLER, Appellee.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks by writ of mandamus to require a former attorney to deliver a transcript of testimony. The attorney has denied possession, or that she ever had possession.

The writ of mandamus does not exist in federal court procedure. (Rule 81(b).) However, under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (All Writs Statute) all courts may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions, including writs in the nature of mandamus.

Writs in the nature of mandamus are to compel an administrative officer to do a nondiscretionary administrative act.

While the attorney practicing in the federal courts is an officer of the federal court, this does not make him or her a federal official performing acts, or refusing to perform acts, done under color of federal authority. No attempt to allege the denial of a civil right can change this fact.

The federal courts lack authority to grant the relief herein sought.

The denial of the petition for a writ of mandamus is affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

FINLEY v. CHANDLER
(May 5, 1967)