Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
In Re William Scheidler
Paid petition
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate: the model weighted this down for a self-represented petitioner.
Question presented
I. RELIEF REQUESTED This case involves a private citizen (plaintiff) v public servants (defendants) who are legally contracted to each other solely under Washington State's constitution and laws mandating defendants exercise their "just powers to protect and maintain individual (plaintiff's) rights." [Article 1 ,section 1]. Therefore this Court should, Compel the 9th Circuit to, or show cause why it does not, apply Washington State's laws that implement Article 1, section 1 as the US 10th amendment provides, 28 USC 1652 demands, and 28 USC 2072(b) prohibits "abridging, modifying or enlarging". Compel the 9th Circuit to exercise its fiduciary obligations to hold its 'officers of the court' to their legal and ethical duty required by Washington's laws as rules FRAP 46, circuit rule 46-2 and LCR 83.3 require. Or, provide plaintiff a forum, which is impartial as 28 USC 455(a) and (b)(4) mandates, to address judges-judging-judges who abridge, modify, or enlarge statutory rights in violation of §2072(b).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
William Scheidler
For respondent
Ione S. George
Case
Subject area
Judicial Power (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Order
Order list, June 18, 2018 · Mandamus denied
Proceedings
- Jun 18 2018Petition DENIED.
- May 29 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.
- May 11 2018Waiver of right of respondents Washington State Supreme Court Clerk Susan Carlson, et al. to respond filed.
- May 04 2018Waiver of right of respondents James Avery, Alan M. Miles, Ione S. George and M. Karlynn Haberly to respond filed.
- Apr 18 2018Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due May 21, 2018)