Powell v. Washington Teachers Union

District of Columbia

Powell v. Washington Teachers Union

968 F. Supp. 2d 267, 2013 WL 5434136, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142821

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedSeptember 26, 2013

DocketCivil Action No. 2013-1478

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 968 F. Supp. 2d 267 (Powell v. Washington Teachers Union) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Powell v. Washington Teachers Union, 968 F. Supp. 2d 267, 2013 WL 5434136, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142821 (D.D.C. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BERYL A. HOWELL, United States District Judge

This matter is before the Court on the petitioner’s application to proceed in for-ma pauperis and his pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. The petitioner is a former employee of the District of Columbia Public Schools who was terminated on November 30, 2010. See Pet. ¶¶ 1, 40. Among other relief, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing respondents “to reinstate [him] as a teacher at the District of Columbia Public Schools ... at a salary of ... $82,600.00 for ... school years 2010, 11, 12, 13 or in the alternative directing them ... to draw a warrant on the education fund in the [amount] of $334,000.00 payable to the order of petitioner.” Id. at 13 (emphasis removed).

The extraordinary writ of mandamus is available to compel an “officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to plaintiff,” 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (emphasis added), and the Court therefore cannot compel either the Washington Teachers Union or the Chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools to provide the relief petitioner demands. See Powell v. Gray, No. 12-0902, 2013 WL 3155367, at *1 (D.D.C. June 14, 2013). The petition for a writ of mandamus will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action “at any time” it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting). An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BERYL A. HOWELL, United States District Judge

This matter is before the Court on the petitioner’s application to proceed in for-ma pauperis and his pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. The petitioner is a former employee of the District of Columbia Public Schools who was terminated on November 30, 2010. See Pet. ¶¶ 1, 40. Among other relief, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing respondents “to reinstate [him] as a teacher at the District of Columbia Public Schools ... at a salary of ... $82,600.00 for ... school years 2010, 11, 12, 13 or in the alternative directing them ... to draw a warrant on the education fund in the [amount] of $334,000.00 payable to the order of petitioner.” Id. at 13 (emphasis removed).

The extraordinary writ of mandamus is available to compel an “officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to plaintiff,” 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (emphasis added), and the Court therefore cannot compel either the Washington Teachers Union or the Chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools to provide the relief petitioner demands. See Powell v. Gray, No. 12-0902, 2013 WL 3155367, at *1 (D.D.C. June 14, 2013). The petition for a writ of mandamus will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action “at any time” it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is wanting). An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

968 F. Supp. 2d 267, 2013 WL 5434136, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powell-v-washington-teachers-union-dcd-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack