C L D - 141 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 10- 1233

___________ I N RE : ELA I N E K A RA S,

Pet i t i oner

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forW r i tof M andamus fr om the U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tforthe D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( R el at ed t o D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 08- cv- 5264)

____________________________________ Sub mi t t e d Unde rRul e 21 , Fe d. R. A pp . P.

M ar ch 4, 2010 B efor e: B A R R Y , FI SH E R and ST A PL E T O N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: M ar ch 30, 2010)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM I n February2003, fol l ow i ng a di s put e overa r es i dent i al l eas e, form ert enant s of E lai n e K ara s filed a n ac ti o n ag ains t her in N ew Jerse yS u p erior C o u rtsee k ing the re turn of a secu ri t ydep osi t . In M arch 20 07 , the S up eri or C ou rtenter ed d efau l tj ud gm ent agai nst K ar as aft ers he fa i l ed t o appea rfort r i al . I n O ct ober2008, K ar as br oughtan ac t i on i n t he D i s t r i ctC our tal l egi ng t hatherform ert enant s and s ever al s t at e courtj udges cons pi r ed,2

dur i ng t he pende ncyof the s t at e courtact i on, t o depr i ve herof herci vi l r i ght s and her r i ghtt o a fa i rt r i al . D efe ndant s fi l ed s epar at e mot i ons t o di s m i s s the compl ai nt . I n a D ece m ber28, 2009 or der , t he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed the fi nal m ot i on t o di s m i s s on t he bas i s t hati tfai l ed t o s t at e a c l ai m upon w hi ch r el i ef maybe gr ant ed. H ow ever , the docke t r efl ect s t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notcl os e the ca s e unt i l J anuary22, 2010, w hen i trul ed o n th e f in a l o u tsta n d in g m o tio n in th e c a se – K a ra s’ m o tio n f o r d e c lar a to ryju d g m e n t. O n J anuary21, 2010, K ar as fi l ed i n t hi s C our ta pet i t i on forw r i tof m andamus as ki ng us t o: 1) r emove of t he D i s t r i ctC our tJ udge as s i gned t o t he ca s e; 2) vaca t e al l of t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s pr i oror der s ; and 3) r emand t he ca s e t o s t at e court . K ar as al l eges t hat t he D i s t r i ctC our tJ udge has engage d i n i m pr operbehavi or , i ncl udi ng comm uni cat i ng ex par t e w i t h defe ns e couns el and del i ber at el yr efus i ng t o docketand/ orr evi ew cert ai n of herfi l i ngs , i ncl udi ng s ever al m ot i ons fors anct i ons . K ar as fur t heral l eges thatthe D i s tr i ct C our thas r epea t edl ym i s r epr es ent ed the fa ct s of the ca s e i n i t s rul i ngs and has i nt ent i onal l yfal s i fi ed and mi s appl i ed the l aw i n or dert o “j us t i fya part i cul arout come. ” (P e titio n f

o r W ri t o f

M a n d a m u s a t 2 .) A w r i tof m andamus i s an extr aor di naryr emedy . See K errv. U . S. D i s tC t . , 426 U .S . 3 9 4 , 4 0 2 (1 9 7 6 ). W ith in th e d isc re tio n o f th e iss u in g c o u rt, m a n d a m u s tra d iti o n a lly m aybe “us ed . . . onl y‘ t o confi ne an i nfer i orcour tt o a l aw ful exer ci s e of i t s pr es cr i bed j ur i s di ct i on ort o compel i tt o exer ci s e i t s author i tyw hen i ti s i t s dutyt o do s o. ’ ” I d. ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed) . A pet i t i onerm us ts how “no otheradequa t e means t o att ai n t he3

d esired reli ef

, an d . . . a righ t t o the w ri t [th at] i s clea r an d ind ispu table.’” S ee In re P a te n a u d e , 2 1 0 F .3 d 1 3 5 , 1 4 1 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ). K ar as pr evi ous l yfi l ed a mot i on i n t he D i s t r i ctC our tt o di s qual i fythe D i s t r i ct C o u rt J u d g e p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 4 5 5 . T h e D is tr ic t C o u rt d e n ie d th e re q u e s t. M andamus i s t he pr operm eans byw hi ch w e r evi ew the deni al of a r ecus al m ot i on fi l ed p u rsua n t t o § 4 5 5 . S ee A lexa n d er v . P ri m erica H o lding s, Inc . , 1 0 F . 3 d 1 5 5 , 1 6 3 (3d C ir . 1993) . O uri nqui r yi s “w hethert he r ecor d, vi ew ed obj ect i vel y , r eas onabl ys uppor t s the a p p e a ra n c e o f

p re ju d ic e o r b ia s .” S e e In re A n ta r, 7 1 F .3 d 9 7 , 1 0 1 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 5 ). J udi ci al rul i ngs al one al m os tnevercons t i tut e a va l i d bas i s fora bi as orpart i al i t ym ot i on and mandam us i s nota s ubs t i tut e forappea l . L i t ekyv. U ni t ed St at es , 510 U . S. 540, 555 ( 1994) ; C heneyv. U . S. D i s t . C t . , 542 U . S. 367, 380- 81. T he r ecor d does notr eas onabl ys uppor tthe appe ar ance of bi as orpr ej udi ce on the p a rt o f th e D istric t C o u rt Ju d g e . K a ra s’ a lleg a tio n s a re u n su p p o rte d b ya n yf a c ts sugg est i ng t hat the D i stri ctC ou rtJudg e has acted i m properl yor that he i s bi ased ag ai nst h e r. C e rta in ly , the D istric t C o u rt’s a lleg e d im p ro p e r re c itatio n o f th e f a c ts o f th e c a se in its ru lin g s d o e s n o t c o n s titu te s u c h a g ro s s a b u s e o f d is c re tio n th a t r e c u s a l is w a rr a n te d . T o th e e x ten t th a t K a ra s c laim s e rro r in th o se ru lin g s, sh e m a ya p p e a l th o se d e c isio n s to t hi s C our t . I d. M or eover , Pet i t i oner ’ s cas e has been c l os ed i n t he D i s t r i ctC our tand a re q u e st to re c u se th e D istric t C o u rt Ju d g e a t th is p o in t is m o o t. K ar as al s o as ks t hatw e vac at e al l of the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s or der s and r emand t hem at t ert o s t at e courtforfur t herpr ocee di ngs . K ar as appea r s t o bas e herr eques ton t he

al l eged i m pr operbehavi orof the D i s t r i ctC our tJ udge. H ow ever , w e have concl uded that t he r ecor d does nots uppor tK ar as ’ al l egat i ons of i m pr opr i ety . Fur t herm or e, ot herthan cl ai m i ng t hat the D i stri ctC ou rthas m i sr epresent ed the fact s of t he case in i t s pri or orders , K aras has no tdescri bed anyspeci fi c err ors m ade b ythe C ou rti n those ruli ng s. Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , m andamus r el i ef i s notappr opr i at e. W e w i l l denyt he pet i t i on.

4