Johnson v. Circuit City Stores, Inc. ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                            UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    JOSEPH R. JOHNSON,                        
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED;               No. 01-1244
    FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL
    BANK,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge.
    (CA-98-1407-A)
    In Re: JOSEPH R. JOHNSON,                 
           No. 01-6286
    Petitioner.
    
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    (CA-98-1407-A)
    Submitted: June 29, 2001
    Decided: September 10, 2001
    Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    No. 01-1244 affirmed and No. 01-6286 petition denied by unpub-
    lished per curiam opinion.
    2                JOHNSON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC.
    COUNSEL
    Joseph R. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Waller Trolinger Dudley, Rob-
    ert J. Lloyd, III, MCGUIRE WOODS, L.L.P., McLean, Virginia, for
    Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Joseph Johnson appeals the district court’s orders directing that
    Johnson’s notice of dismissal not be filed in a closed case and deny-
    ing his motions to set aside the judgment and for a hearing on the
    matter. Johnson has also filed a petition for writ of mandamus
    requesting that this court direct the district court to file the notice of
    dismissal. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders
    and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the orders on the
    reasoning of the district court. We deny Johnson’s mandamus petition
    because he is not entitled to the relief he seeks.
    The Appellees have filed a motion for sanctions under Fed. R. App.
    P. 38. Johnson’s filing of this appeal, asking the court to revisit litiga-
    tion that was finally decided on its merits nearly two years ago, is suf-
    ficiently abusive to merit granting sanctions in favor of the Appellees.
    In re Vincent, 
    105 F.3d 943
    , 945 (4th Cir. 1997). Johnson’s litigation
    efforts are obviously misguided and it is clear from the record that he
    has acted in bad faith. Chambers v. NASCO, 
    501 U.S. 32
    , 45-46
    (1991). At this point, it appears that absent intervention by this court,
    Johnson will continue to file frivolous appeals.* Johnson has had
    *Aside from the appeals sub judice, Johnson has filed seven other
    appeals involving the Appellees, all of which were frivolous. See John-
    son v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., Nos. 99-2020, 99-2021, 99-2022, 00-
    2144, 00-2145, 00-2146, 01-6078.
    JOHNSON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC.                 3
    notice from the court regarding the possibility of Rule 38 sanctions
    and was afforded reasonable opportunity to respond and he has done
    so. See Fed. R. App. P. 38.
    In lieu of particularized fees and costs, we order Johnson to pay
    sanctions in the amount of $500.00. See Vincent, 
    105 F.3d at 945
    ;
    Brock v. Angelone, 
    105 F.3d 952
    , 954 (4th Cir. 1997). Additionally,
    we enjoin Johnson from filing any further civil appeals in this court
    until the monetary sanctions are paid, and unless a district court judge
    certifies that his appeal is not frivolous. See Brock, 
    105 F.3d at 954
    .
    We deny Johnson’s motion to waive copy requirements. We dis-
    pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    No. 01-1244 - AFFIRMED
    No. 01-6286 - PETITION DENIED
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-1244, 01-6286

Judges: Wilkins, Luttig, Michael

Filed Date: 9/10/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024