Potts v. Obenland

W.D. Washington

Potts v. Obenland

DecidedFebruary 12, 2021

Docket3:19-cv-05541

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Potts v. Obenland, (W.D. Wash. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 7 SIDNEY ALBERT POTTS, CASE NO. C19-5541 BHS 8 Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 v. 10 MIKE OBENLAND, 11 Respondent. 12

13 This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Sidney Potts’ amended petition 14 for writ of habeas corpus. Dkt. 12. 15 The Court has been advised by staff at Monroe Correctional Complex that Mr. 16 Potts passed away on January 21, 2021. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus should 17 be dismissed as moot if Mr. Potts has in fact passed away. See, e.g., Griffey v. Lindsey, 18 349 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2003); Germino v. Marshall, No. CIV S-08-3010, 2010 WL 19 5393907, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2010) (“I[n] these habeas proceedings the relief 20 sought, i.e., petitioner’s immediate release from custody, is unique to the petitioner 21 himself and cannot be transferred.”); Pennewell v. Carey, No. 2:06-cv-0598 JKS EFB, 22 2008 WL 1860166, at * 1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2008) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)) (“In 1 other words, the claims [are] extinguished upon [a] petitioner’s death and no party can be 2 substituted for him.”).

3 Therefore, the Respondent is ordered to show cause, no later than February 24, 4 2021, as to why this action should not be dismissed as moot pursuant to the above 5 authority. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated this 12th day of February, 2021. A 8 9 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE 10 United States District Judge

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

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

1 2

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 7 SIDNEY ALBERT POTTS, CASE NO. C19-5541 BHS 8 Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 v. 10 MIKE OBENLAND, 11 Respondent. 12

13 This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Sidney Potts’ amended petition 14 for writ of habeas corpus. Dkt. 12. 15 The Court has been advised by staff at Monroe Correctional Complex that Mr. 16 Potts passed away on January 21, 2021. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus should 17 be dismissed as moot if Mr. Potts has in fact passed away. See, e.g., Griffey v. Lindsey, 18 349 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2003); Germino v. Marshall, No. CIV S-08-3010, 2010 WL 19 5393907, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2010) (“I[n] these habeas proceedings the relief 20 sought, i.e., petitioner’s immediate release from custody, is unique to the petitioner 21 himself and cannot be transferred.”); Pennewell v. Carey, No. 2:06-cv-0598 JKS EFB, 22 2008 WL 1860166, at * 1 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2008) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)) (“In 1 other words, the claims [are] extinguished upon [a] petitioner’s death and no party can be 2 substituted for him.”).

3 Therefore, the Respondent is ordered to show cause, no later than February 24, 4 2021, as to why this action should not be dismissed as moot pursuant to the above 5 authority. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated this 12th day of February, 2021. A 8 9 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE 10 United States District Judge

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Potts v. Obenland, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/potts-v-obenland-wawd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack