Richardson v. Virginia State Department Of Corrections
MEMORANDUM OPINION. READ OPINION for complete details. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 02/15/2017. Copy mailed to Plaintiff.(ccol, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
FEB I 6 20!7
GREGORY A. RICHARDSON,
CLERK. U.S. D1STR1CT COUR1
Civil Action No. 3:17CV101
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
a Virginia detainee proceeding pro
se submitted an action he labeled, "MOTION TO VACATE."
By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on January 8, 2009,
the Court subjected all litigation submitted by Richardson to a
Absent a bona fide emergency, the Court will
Richardson . . . .
If Richardson files a new action while another
action is pending before the Court, the new action
If an action is transferred or removed to
this Court while another action is currently pending
before the Court, the new action will be filed and
summarily dismissed without prejudice.
dismiss a pending action to expedite another action
that he wishes the Court to consider.
will be with prejudice if a responsive
pleading or motion has been filed.
Richardson may not simultaneously litigate
multiple challenges to his current custody in state
and federal courts.
See 28 u.s.c. § 2244(b}; 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (b) (1) (A).
Richardson is precluded from writing on both
sides of any submission.
All petitions for writs of habeas corpus and
civil rights actions under 42 u. S. C. § 1983 must be
submitted on the standardized forms, which may be
obtained f ram the Clerk of Court. To the extent that
Richardson wishes to pursue an action under some other
statute than 28 U.S.C. § 2241, 28 U.S.C § 2254, or 42
u.s.c. § 1983, he must identify the statute that
authorizes the action at top of the first page of the
action and succinctly explain why that statute is
In order to monitor Richardson's repetitious
and multiplicitious litigation he must attach to each
new complaint or petition a separate document entitled
(a) Identify by style,
current status, all cases filed by him or in
which he has been a plaintiff or petitioner
within the one year period preceding the filing
of the certificate.
Richardson shall also
identify in which court the case was filed;
(b) Certify that the claims he wishes to
present are new claims never before raised and
dismissed with prejudice by any federal court and
set forth why each claim could not have been
raised in one of his prior federal actions;
separate subparagraphs for each of the defendants
the facts that Richardson believes entitle him to
relief against the defendant and the basis for
subparagraph must, standing alone and without
reference to other subparagraphs, exhibits, or
attachments, establish that the claim against the
defendant is made in good faith, and has a
tenable basis in fact and is not frivolous;
(d) Contain Richardson's statement under
penalty of perjury that the statements made in
the certificate of compliance are true.
Richardson's failure to comply strictly with the
requirements set forth above will result in summary denial
the motion for
misrepresents any facts he will be subject to appropriate
Id. at 1-3.
For example, Richardson wrote oN both sides of his
failed to identify the statute that authorizes
the action at top of the first page of the action and succinctly
explain why that statute is applicable,
and failed to file
Accordingly, the action will be dismissed without prejudice.
Opinion to Richardson.
Robert E. Payne
Senior 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?