Eccarius v. Mendocino County Social Services
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:22-cv-05417
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Eccarius v. Mendocino County Social Services, Judge Gilliam dismissed the petition for lack of custody and denied a certificate of appealability.
Anthony Carl Eccarius’s federal custody-review petition was dismissed. The court did not decide the merits of his allegations against Mendocino County Social Services, the National Labor Relations Board, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
What happened
In Eccarius v. Mendocino County Social Services, Anthony Carl Eccarius filed a self-represented petition asking for federal review of claims involving jurisdiction, discrimination, disability accommodations, protected leave, and retaliation.
The court dismissed the petition because Eccarius was not in custody of the federal government or California, a requirement for this type of federal review. The court did not decide the underlying claims.
Judge Gilliam also denied a certificate of appealability, meaning the court would not issue the document generally required to appeal this type of ruling. The clerk was directed to send Eccarius two civil-rights complaint forms.
The detailed version
- Eccarius v. Mendocino County Social Services · No. 4:22-cv-05417
- Haywood Gilliam
- Oct. 13, 2022
Background
Anthony Carl Eccarius filed a self-represented action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law allowing a person in qualifying custody to seek relief from unlawful custody. The petition named Mendocino County Social Services, the National Labor Relations Board, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as respondents.
The petition alleged claims involving original jurisdiction, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, leave protected by the California Family Rights Act and the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, retaliation, investigations, due process, and a Weingarten claim. Eccarius requested court review, compensation for lost wages and lasting harm, and a jury trial.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that federal habeas jurisdiction under § 2241 is available only when the petitioner is in custody in violation of federal law or the Constitution. The court treated the custody requirement as jurisdictional, meaning the court could not hear the petition without it.
The court found that Eccarius was not in the custody of the United States or California. It therefore dismissed the petition for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction without reaching the merits of Eccarius’s other claims.
Ruling
The court dismissed the petition for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction and denied a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is a court-issued document required for an appeal of this type of ruling. The clerk was directed to send Eccarius two copies of the court’s civil-rights complaint form. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.