Jacobs, Chris v. Wis. Judicial Commission et al

Filing 10

Transmission of Notice of Appeal, Docket Sheet and Judgment to Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals re 8 Notice of Appeal. (Attachments: # 1 Order, # 2 Judgment, # 3 Docket sheet) (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CHRIS J. JACOBS,
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff,
17-cv-98-bbc
v.
WISCONSIN JUDICIAL COMMISSION,
SUSAN RAIMER and DIANA FREMGEN,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Pro se plaintiff Chris Jacobs, who is incarcerated at the Columbia County
Correctional Institution, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in which he requests
that this court order defendants Wisconsin Judicial Commission, Columbia County Clerk
of Court Susan Raimer and Appeals and Supreme Court Clerk Diana Fremgen to “move
forward” his state court case relating to various conditions of his confinement. In addition,
plaintiff has filed two separate motions to add other state court officials and employees and
prison staff as defendants. Dkt. ##2 and 5. In these motions, plaintiff lists a number of
issues related to his underlying conviction and mentions various problems he has experienced
in prison, but he has not raised any claims and does not seek relief apart from the request
for a writ of mandamus.
A threshold problem is that generally a plaintiff cannot proceed with multiple
1

complaints; rather, the rule is that an amended complaint replaces any complaint that was
filed earlier. Flannery v. Recording Industry Association of America, 354 F.3d 632, 638 (7th
Cir. 2004) (amended complaint “renders the original complaint void”). However, I need not
ask plaintiff to refile his complaint as one document because none of the documents include
allegations that state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The All Writs Act authorizes federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate
in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28
U.S.C. § 1651(a). However, the act does not increase the scope of federal jurisdiction, which
is lacking in this case. In re Campbell, 264 F.3d 730, 731 (7th Cir. 2001); Davis v. Spoden,
2009 WL 483180, at *1 (W.D. Wis. Feb. 25, 2009). Federal district courts lack jurisdiction
to issue a writ of mandamus to direct state courts in the performance of their duties. Id.;
Hill v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation, 405 F.3d 572, 577 (7th Cir. 2005). Because this
court does not have the authority to grant plaintiff’s requested relief, I am dismissing his
petition and denying the motions to add defendants.

2

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Chris Jacobs’s petition for a writ of mandamus, dkt.
#1, is DISMISSED and his motions to add defendants, dkt. ##2 and 5, are DENIED.
Entered this 22d day of May, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge

3