Montgomery v. Goodwin

Filing 14

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 13 Motion for Writ of Mandamus. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kathleen Kay on 4/2/2018. (crt,Haik, K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

KENNITH W. MONTGOMERY
D.O.C. # 123966

:

DOCKET NO. 18-cv-0067

VERSUS

:

UNASSIGNED DISTRICT JUDGE

JERRY GOODWIN

:

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Before the court is a “Motion for Writ of Mandamus” [doc. 13] filed by petitioner Richard
Montgomery, who is seeking relief from this court through a petition for writ of habeas corpus
[docs. 1, 8] filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Montgomery is an inmate in the custody of the
Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections and is currently incarcerated at David
Wade Correctional Center (“DWCC”) in Homer, Louisiana.
I.
BACKGROUND
In this motion Montgomery seeks injunctive relief against Keith Cooley, warden of Allen
Correctional Center (“ALC”), and James M. LeBlanc, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of
Public Safety and Corrections. He alleges that he was transferred from ALC to DWCC on August
31, 2016, before the filing of this suit, and that his legal papers have not been forwarded. Doc. 15.
He also contends that Cooley has refused to answer his complaints. Id. Accordingly, he requests
that the court order Cooley and LeBlanc to turn over his legal papers from ALC.

-1-

II.
LAW & ANALYSIS
Preliminary injunctive relief “is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, and should only be
granted when the movant has clearly carried the burden of persuasion.” Anderson v. Jackson, 556
F.3d 351, 360 (5th Cir. 2009) (quotations omitted). Specifically, a movant must establish all of the
following elements:
(1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, (2) a substantial threat
of irreparable injury if the injunction is not issued, (3) that the threatened
injury if the injunction is denied outweighs any harm that will result if the
injunction is granted, and (4) that the grant of an injunction will not disserve
the public interest.
Byrum v. Landreth, 566 F.3d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 2009).
This court has no jurisdiction to order injunctive relief against a non-party, even assuming
that Montgomery could meet his burden on the above factors. Garrett v. Stephens, 2015 WL
1390781 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 23, 2015). As sole respondent in his case, Montgomery has properly
named the warden of the facility where he is currently incarcerated. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 124 S.Ct.
2711, 2718 (2004). Thus, neither Cooley nor LeBlanc is a party to this suit and the court has no
jurisdiction to grant the relief that Montgomery requests. Montgomery may instead seek relief
through a separate suit against these individuals.
III.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Motion is DENIED, without prejudice to Montgomery’s right
to seek relief through a separate lawsuit.

-2-

THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers this 2nd day of April, 2018.

-3-