Shreves v. Department of Corrections

Opinion

ORIGINAL 05/10/2022

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: OP 22-0122

OP 22-0122

RICHARD E. SHREVES, FILED Petitioner,

MAY 1 0 2022 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Suprerne Court

State of Montana

v. ORDER DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

Representing himself, Richard E. Shreves seeks rehearing, pursuant to M.

R. App.

P. 20(1), of this Court's March 22, 2022 Order denying his petition for writ of mandate

against the Department of Corrections. Shreves argues that the Court erred in concluding

that "a civil rights complaint in either state or federal court was a plain[ ] and adequate

remedy."

M. R. App. P. 20(1) provides criteria for rehearing. Pertinent here, this Court will

consider a petition for rehearing only upon the grounds "[t]hat it overlo oked some fact

material to the decision[,] . . . or [t]hat its decision conflicts with a statute or controlling

decision not addressed by the supreme court." M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i)

and (iii). "Absent

clearly demonstrated exceptional circumstances, the supreme court will not grant petitions

for rehearing of its orders disposing of motions or petitions for extraordinar y writs." M.

R. App. P. 20(1)(d).

Our Order pointed out that "[a] writ of mandate will not issue absent the availa bility

of another remedy in the ordinary course of law." Shreves contends that he does not have

a speedy remedy under the law and that the Court failed to analyze the issues, such as

irreparable harm. He concludes that "a civil action and resulting damag es does nothing to

provide meaningful nor timely relief, neither for services that meet the basic need of

general well-being, nor for basic nutrition DOC asserts it provides in each meal."

This Court has authority to dismiss a writ in an original proceeding procedurally and without analyzing any claim. M. R. App. P. 14(7)(a). Shreves misses the purpose of a writ of mandate because such a writ occupies the space where no other remedy exists. Section 27-26-102, MCA. Shreves's claims present factual issues, not simply the enforcement of a clear legal duty. His claims of immediate and irreparable injury are redressable in a civil action where a court may receive evidence and develop a record. His references to Montana case law do not assist his arguments because both elements for a writ of mandate existed in those cases. See OPD v. McMeekin, 2009 MT 439, 354 Mont. 130, 224 P.3d 616 and State ex re. Burkhartsmeyer Bros. v. McCormick, 162 Mont. 234, 5810 P.2d 266 (1973). Shreves has not demonstrated any criteria for rehearing.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Shreves's Petition for Rehearing is DENIED. The Clerk of the Supreme Court is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to Richard E. Shreves personally.

DATED thist t•N day of May, 2022.