MOSES J. CHILEMBWE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
CHRISTOPHER BOND ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the instant civil rights action was frivolous because the admissibility of the documents at issue would be determined in a prior, ongoing case.
Petitioner, convicted and placed on probation, violated terms by moving and was extradited. He then filed a civil rights action alleging forged docume…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Frivolous Actions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner Moses Chilembwe was convicted on a Missouri state charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon. He was sentenced to a term of 8 years’ imprisonment but placed on probation. Thereafter he violated the terms of his probation by moving to Nevada. A request for extradition was made by Missouri, and Missouri officers eventually traveled to Las Vegas, Nevada, where they took custody of petitioner. Upon returning petitioner to Missouri, the state authorities revoked his probation and ordered his incarceration.
Shortly thereafter petitioner instituted a civil rights action [not the instant action] against certain of the persons involved in his transfer to Missouri. This action is still in progress in federal district court before Judge Nangle.
The instant action was also filed in the Eastern District of Missouri, but assigned to Judge Wangelin. In his petition, Chilembwe alleges that certain documents submitted by respondents in the action before Judge Nangle were forgeries. The relief requested included damages and an injunc tion against Judge Nangle’s giving any consideration to the documents. Judge Wangelin entered an order dismissing the action as frivolous. We agree that this action is frivolous inasmuch as Judge Nangle will ultimately rule on the admissibility of these documents in the prior case.
The judgment of dismissal is affirmed.