Main v. Altieri et al

Filing 2

ORDER: This case is DISMISSED with no leave to amend. 1 Motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 4/22/2009. (kak)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT Christopher Main, Plaintiff, v. Estate of Gerard Altieri, Bennington Superior Court, and Vermont Supreme Court, Defendants. : : : : : : : : :

File No. 1:09-CV-108

OPINION AND ORDER (Paper 1) Plaintiff Christopher Main, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition asks

this Court to compel the Vermont Supreme Court to reach the merits of an appeal in a civil case. Main claims that the

Vermont Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds, and that the dismissal violated his constitutional rights. Pending before the Court is Main's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Before a court grants an application

to proceed in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 mandates that it conduct an initial screening to ensure that the complaint has a legal basis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A court must dismiss

the complaint sua sponte if it determines that the allegations of poverty are untrue or if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Because Main's request for a writ of mandamus is misplaced, this case must be dismissed at the outset. The Court has no

jurisdiction to compel action by state officials via a writ of mandamus. Davis v. Lansing, 851 F.2d 72, 74 (2d Cir. 1988);

White v. Ward, 145 F.3d 1139, 1139 (10th Cir. 1998); Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969). Moreover, federal district courts cannot review state

court orders, even when the plaintiff claims that those orders were unconstitutional. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals This case is therefore

v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482-88 (1983). DISMISSED, with no leave to amend.

See Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222

F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (denying request to amend as futile). Main's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Paper 1) is DENIED as moot. Dated at Brattleboro, in the District of Vermont, this 22nd day of April, 2009. /s/ J. Garvan Murtha J. Garvan Murtha United States District Judge

2