Fifth Circuit Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the 5th Circuit Federal Court - Court of Appeals

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions - 5th Circuit
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_______________
No. 92-8155
_______________
IN RE:
BOB SLAGLE,
Petitioner.
_________________________
Petition for Writ of Mandamus to
the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
_________________________
(May 11, 1992)
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
CERTIFICATE OF QUESTION
FROM COURT OF APPEALS
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1254(3)
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The underlying matter involves three redistricting cases
concerning the reapportionment of Texas's legislative and congres-
sional districts, Terrazas v. Richards, Nos. A-91-CA-425, A-91-CA-
426, and A-91-CA-428 (W.D. Tex). The three-judge district court
has entered various substantive orders and judgments that effec-
tively require the State of Texas to conduct elections under a
court-ordered, interim redistricting plan. See Terrazas v.

Richards, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19860 (Dec. 24, 1991). The orders
have been appealed to the United States Supreme Court and are
pending as No. 91-1270, Richards v. Terrazas, and No. 91-1546,
Slagle v. Terrazas.
Petitioner Bob Slagle, Chairman of the Texas Democratic Party,
filed two motions asking the Honorable James Nowlin, a member of
the three-judge panel, to recuse and raised the recusal issue again
in a motion to vacate. Judge Nowlin individually denied the
motions. The petitioner also filed a motion requesting the full
three-judge court to review Judge Nowlin's failure to recuse. That
motion was not acted upon by the three-judge court; instead, Judge
Nowlin individually denied it.
On April 1, 1992, the petitoner filed in this court, as No.
92-8155, a petition for writ of mandamus asking the court to compel
Judge Nowlin to disqualify himself from participating in the
ongoing district court proceedings. This court sua sponte has
raised the question of whether mandamus lies in the court of
appeals or instead in the Supreme Court.
QUESTION CERTIFIED
Where an individual judge, who is a member of a three-judge
district court panel, has denied a motion to disqualify him, does
a petition for writ of mandamus to compel his disqualification lie
in the United States Court of Appeals or, instead, in the United
States Supreme Court?
2

REASON FOR THE CERTIFICATE
This question is res nova. Appeals from the orders of three-
judge district courts lie in the Supreme Court, but no reported
authority has considered where a petition for writ of mandamus
regarding disqualification lies. In light of the fact that appeals
on the merits in this matter are pending in the Supreme Court, the
Court may wish to address the jurisdictional issue regarding
disqualification.
QUESTION CERTIFIED.
3