No. 25-5715

In Re Daniel E. Hall

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2025-09-24
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: all-writs-act judicial-conduct judicial-review magistrate-appointment mandamus-relief misconduct-complaints
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2026-02-27 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Whether the Judicial Council of the First Circuit may disregard mandatory
provisions of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act and the Rules for Judicial-
Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings by refusing to reassign misconduct
complaints under Rule 25(f) once all circuit judges are disqualified.

2. Whether the Council may suppress review by severing related complaints in violation
of Rules 6(b)-(c) and by failing to docket subject judges under Rule 8(a).

3. Whether the reappointment of Magistrate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone despite notice
of misconduct, and the appointment of Magistrate Judge Talesha L. Saint-Marc in
violation of 28 U.S.C. § 631(b)(5), constitute unlawful acts requiring correction under
the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act.

4. Whether mandamus relief is warranted under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a),
where the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act provides no avenue for judicial review
and no other adequate remedy exists.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Judicial Council of the First Circuit may disregard mandatory provisions of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act and improperly handle judicial misconduct complaints

Docket Entries

2026-02-11
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/27/2026.
2025-11-29
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2025-11-24
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2025-11-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/21/2025.
2025-09-15
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 24, 2025)

Attorneys

Daniel E. Hall
Daniel E. Hall — Petitioner