Legal Opinion

Ellis v. United States District Court for the Western District of Washington

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 5, 2004No. 01-70724PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

We hereby DENY Respondent’s Motion for Recall and Stay of Mandate because, due to the nature of mandamus proceedings, we have not issued a “mandate.” As we explain below, our grant of Ellis’s petition for a writ of mandamus operated as “a writ of mandate,” which took immediate effect.

A writ of mandate is “an order from an appellate court directing a lower court to take a specified action.” Black’s Law Dictionary 973 (7th ed.1999). Because a writ *1023of mandate functions as an order, we do not issue along with it a “mandate” in the sense of a secondary decree relinquishing jurisdiction over…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Woodson v. Surgitek, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
  2. Vito Sgaraglino v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, an Illinois CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Zermeno-Gomez v. United States District Court for the District of ArizonaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  2. In Re EllisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  3. Hasmik Chinaryan v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
  4. BYRD v. FINLEYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
  5. Fernando Allen Sanchez v. County of San Diego, by and through its Health & Human Services Agency (HHSA); et al.District Court, S.D. California · 2026

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API