Foster v. Neil

W.D. Louisiana

Foster v. Neil

DecidedJune 28, 2024

Docket5:24-cv-00401

StatusUnknown

This text of Foster v. Neil (Foster v. Neil) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Foster v. Neil, (W.D. La. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION

JEREMY DEWAYNE FOSTER #609509 CASE NO. 5:24-CV-00401 SEC P VERSUS JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY LONNIE NEIL ET AL MAG. JUDGE KAYLA D. MCCLUSKY ORDER Considering the foregoing pro se Motion [Doc. No. 26] filed by Jeremy Foster (“Foster’’), IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. The plaintiff does not cite any agreement with any defendant to arbitrate. See Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614, 626 (1985) (“[T]he first task of a court asked to compel arbitration of a dispute is to determine whether the parties agreed to arbitrate that dispute.”). To the extent he moves for a writ of mandamus, the Motion is further DENIED. “The district courts shall 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Here, however, defendants are not officers or employees of the United States or any agency thereof. MONROE, LOUISIANA, this 28" day of June 2024. =

f Terry A. De Mee / inited States District

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION

JEREMY DEWAYNE FOSTER #609509 CASE NO. 5:24-CV-00401 SEC P VERSUS JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY LONNIE NEIL ET AL MAG. JUDGE KAYLA D. MCCLUSKY ORDER Considering the foregoing pro se Motion [Doc. No. 26] filed by Jeremy Foster (“Foster’’), IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. The plaintiff does not cite any agreement with any defendant to arbitrate. See Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614, 626 (1985) (“[T]he first task of a court asked to compel arbitration of a dispute is to determine whether the parties agreed to arbitrate that dispute.”). To the extent he moves for a writ of mandamus, the Motion is further DENIED. “The district courts shall 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Here, however, defendants are not officers or employees of the United States or any agency thereof. MONROE, LOUISIANA, this 28" day of June 2024. =

f Terry A. De Mee / inited States District

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Foster v. Neil, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-neil-lawd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack