West v. Lew

District of Columbia

West v. Lew

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedApril 28, 2015

DocketCivil Action No. 2015-0640

StatusPublished

This text of West v. Lew (West v. Lew) 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

West v. Lew, (D.D.C. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 8

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Blunt, U.S. District & Bankruptcy

Courts for the District of Columbia

GARY EMERSON WEST, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Case: 1:15—cv-00640 v. ) Assigned To : Unassigned ) Assign. Date : 4/28/2015 JACOB J. LEW, etal., ) Descr'Pt'Oni Pro Se Gen. Clvul (F) ) Respondents. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a pleading is frivolous, and such ﬁnding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. Demon v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); see Neitzke v. Williams, 490 US. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact”). Having reviewed the petition, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are

identiﬁable are baseless and wholly incredible. Furthermore, the allegations of the petition “constitute the sort of patently insubstantial claims” that deprive the Court of subject matter jurisdiction. T ooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (DC. Cir. 2009). The petition therefore will be dismissed with prejudice.

An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: 4 12(9)“) strict Judge

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

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 8

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Blunt, U.S. District & Bankruptcy

Courts for the District of Columbia

GARY EMERSON WEST, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Case: 1:15—cv-00640 v. ) Assigned To : Unassigned ) Assign. Date : 4/28/2015 JACOB J. LEW, etal., ) Descr'Pt'Oni Pro Se Gen. Clvul (F) ) Respondents. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a pleading is frivolous, and such ﬁnding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. Demon v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); see Neitzke v. Williams, 490 US. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact”). Having reviewed the petition, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are

identiﬁable are baseless and wholly incredible. Furthermore, the allegations of the petition “constitute the sort of patently insubstantial claims” that deprive the Court of subject matter jurisdiction. T ooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (DC. Cir. 2009). The petition therefore will be dismissed with prejudice.

An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

DATE: 4 12(9)“) strict Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

West v. Lew, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-lew-dcd-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack