Legal Opinion
In Re: Joseph W. Higgins v.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided August 28, 2012No. 12-3021Unpublished
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
Petitioner, Joseph W. Higgins, seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the District Court to rule on his Motion for Default Judgment, which was filed in January 2012. For the following reasons, mandamus relief is not warranted.
Higgins filed a complaint alleging that he is the victim of a conspiracy of “unlawful, intentional, willful and evil misconduct of retaliation” and invidious discrimination at the hands of several state court judges, state court employees, and a United States District Judge. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the basis of res judicata, because the same…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Ronald Madden v. Kevin Myers, Honorable Malcolm Muir, United States District Judge, NominalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
- In Re Grand Jury ABC Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012