Gooden v. Natchez Adams County Jail et al
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION Dismissing without Prejudice. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 2/1/17 (MGB)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-91-DCB-JCG
NATCHEZ ADAMS COUNTY JAIL, et al.
This matter is before the Court, sua sponte, for consideration of dismissal. Petitioner Terry
Gooden, while incarcerated at the Adams County Jail, Natchez, Mississippi, filed this Petition 
for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Having reviewed the record, the Court finds
that Petitioner has a petition for habeas relief pending in this Court in Gooden v. Patton, No. 5:16cv-90-DCB-RHW. Having considered the Petition , applicable case law and statutes, the Court
finds that the instant civil action is duplicative of a pending habeas and therefore, it will be
dismissed without prejudice.
Petitioner filed the instant request for habeas relief on October 7, 2016. Pet.  at 1.
Liberally construing the Petition, the Court finds that Petitioner is challenging several convictions
he received in the Justice Court of Adams County, Mississippi. As stated above, a review of the
Court record reveals that Petitioner filed a separate petition for habeas relief concerning the same
convictions. See Gooden v. Patton, No. 5:16-cv-90-DCB-RHW.
The Court has the authority to dismiss a civil action which is duplicative of another action
filed in federal court. See Green v. Quarterman, 2008 WL 2489840, at *2 (S.D. Tex. June 18,
2008); (citing Remington Rand Corp. v. Bus. Sys. Inc., 830 F.2d 1274, 1275-76 (quoting Landis v.
N. Amer. Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936) (recognizing that there is a “power inherent in every court to
control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for
counsel, and for litigants”)); see also Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Marino, 63 F.3d 574, 578 (7th Cir.
1995) (“A federal suit may be dismissed for ‘reasons of wise judicial administration ... whenever
it is duplicative of a parallel action already pending in another federal court.’ ”). The Court has
compared the Petition filed in Gooden v. Patton, No. 5:16-cv-90-DCB-RHW, with the one filed in
the instant civil action and finds that the Petitions challenge the same convictions in the same court.
The Court therefore has determined that the most efficient and convenient manner in which the
parties, counsel, and the Court should proceed is for Petitioner to fully litigate his habeas claims in
Gooden v. Patton, No. 5:16-cv-90-DCB-RHW, and to dismiss the instant civil habeas action without
prejudice as duplicative.
For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds that this Petition is dismissed without
prejudice so that Petitioner may litigate his request for habeas relief, including any assertions
presented in this civil action, in Gooden v. Patton, No. 5:16-cv-90-DCB-RHW.
A Final Judgment in accordance with this Memorandum Opinion and Order will be issued
SO ORDERED, this the 1st
day of February, 2017.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?