Opinion
C.A. No. 02M-04-120
Submitted: July 23, 2002
Decided: September 5, 2002
ORDER
(1) This 5th day of September 2002, upon consideration of the defendant's motion to dismiss this action for mandamus, it appears that: That the plaintiff is a prisoner currently incarcerated at a federal correctional facility in Tennessee. (2) That the defendant Lichtenstader was formerly the Chairperson of the Delaware Board of Parole, having retired from that position in April 2002. (3) That the Board of Parole of the State of Delaware, by decision dated June 8, 2001, granted the plaintiff's release on parole. Specifically, the decision paroled him to the federal sentence and attached one special condition: "Upon completion of federal sentence, federal authorities are requested to provide status report and recommendation, as appropriate, to the Delaware Board of Parole." (4) That the plaintiff has filed other lawsuits seeking to address his status in the federal penitentiary: Chester Woulard v. Rapahel Williams, Warden, C.A. 01M-05-021 (still pending); and Chester Woulard v. Rapahel Williams, MPCJF and Marlene Lichtenstader, C.A. 01M-05-053, petition for habeas corpus (dismissed). (5) "A writ of mandamus is a command that may be issued by the Superior Court to an inferior court, public official, or agency to compel the performance of a duty to which the petitioner has established a clear legal right. . . . A writ of mandamus will not issue, however, unless the petitioner has established that there is no other adequate remedy available." (6) This action must be dismissed for three reasons. First, the motion is unopposed. Second, Marlene Lichtenstader is no longer a state employee. Third, the petitioner has another lawsuit pending where the question of his status is pending; thus this action is duplicative of at least another remedy available to him.
Clough v. State, Del. Supr., 686 A.2d 158 (1996).
IT IS SO ORDERED.