Ellis v. United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
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
- Woodson v. Surgitek, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
- Vito Sgaraglino v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, an Illinois CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
3Cited by9 opinions
- Zermeno-Gomez v. United States District Court for the District of ArizonaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- In Re EllisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Hasmik Chinaryan v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
- BYRD v. FINLEYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- 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.