Ravenell v. Mayorkas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that 1915(g) merely announced a new procedural rule and that this court may therefore count prisoner suits dismissed prior to the statute's enactment as strikes
• holding that “petitions for a writ of mandamus are included within the meaning of the term ‘civil action’ as used in § 1915”
• holding that \petitions for a writ of mandamus are included within the meaning of the term 'civil action'\ for purposes of the PLRA
• concluding that “petitions for a writ of mandamus are included within the meaning of the term ‘civil action’ as used in § 1915”
• concluding that petitions for writs of mandamus are “civil actions” as defined by § 1915
• holding that section 1915(g) does not run afoul of Landgraf because it is a “procedural rule”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).