Don Boyd v. KLLM Transport Service

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion-- granting Boyd s motion to have his mitigative briefs considered as his informal briefs, but deny his remaining motions, including his motion for waiver of service, his motion to deconsolidate, and his motion to direct the district court to provide him with a certified copy of the record. Originating case number: 3:10-cv-03208-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998786767]. Mailed to: Don Boyd. [11-1983, 11-1990, 11-1996, 11-1998, 11-2143, 11-2144]

Appeal: 11-1983

Document: 17

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 1 of 5

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1983

DON BOYD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
KLLM TRANSPORT SERVICES, INCORPORATED; WELLS MARBLE &
HURST, PLLC; ROY H. LIDDELL; KEVIN A. ROGERS; SOUTHEASTERN
TRAINING CENTERS, Inc.; DANIEL COKER HORTON, & Bell PA; J.
WYATT HAZARD; CAROLYN CURRY SATCHER; J. T. ROBINSON;
DAVID L. REDD; W. STAN SULLIVAN; DOE CLERK ONE; DOE CLERK
TWO; DOE CLERK THREE; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United
States
District
Court
for
the
Western
District
of
Louisiana; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States District
Court for the Southern District of Mississippi; UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA, United States Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit,
Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-1990

DON BOYD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
CITY of COLUMBIA; STATE of SOUTH CAROLINA; GARY H. JOHNSON,
II,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal: 11-1983

Document: 17

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 2 of 5

No. 11-1996

DON BOYD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BI-LO, INCORPORATED; HUNTER & FOSTER PA; LAWRENCE M HUNTER,
JR.; SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE OF,
Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-1998

DON BOYD,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
WAL-MART
STORES,
INCORPORATED;
WAL-MART
SUPERCENTER,
INCORPORATED; NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH; CLARENCE
DAVIS; AISHA S LUSK; CHRISTOPHER C GENOVESE; SOUTH
CAROLINA, STATE OF,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Columbia.
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:10-cv-03208-JFA; 3:11-cv-00013-JFA; 3:10-cv03209-JFA; 3:11-cv-00845-JFA)

2

Appeal: 11-1983

Document: 17

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 3 of 5

No. 11-2143

In re:

DON BOYD,
Petitioner.

No. 11-2144

In re:

DON BOYD,
Petitioner.

On Petitions for Writ of Mandamus. (3:10-cv-03209-JFA-PJG;
3:11-cv-00845-JFA)

Submitted:

February 9, 2012

Decided:

February 13, 2012

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Nos. 11-1983, 11-1990, 11-1996, 11-1998, affirmed; Nos. 11-2143,
11-2144, petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Don Boyd, Appellant/Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

3

Appeal: 11-1983

Document: 17

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 4 of 5

PER CURIAM:
We have consolidated six proceedings brought by Don
Boyd for consideration, and we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis in all.

In case numbers 11-1983, 11-1990, 11-1996, and

11-1998, Boyd appeals the district court’s orders adopting the
magistrate judge’s reports and denying relief on Boyd’s claims
brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006).
the

records

and

find

no

reversible

error.

We have reviewed
Accordingly,

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

we

Boyd v.

KLLM Transport Servs., No. 3:10-cv-03208-JFA (D.S.C. Aug. 12,
2011); Boyd v. City of Columbia, No. 3:11-cv-00013-JFA (D.S.C.
Aug.

12,

(D.S.C.,

2011);

Boyd

Aug. 12,

v.

2011);

Bi-Lo,
Boyd

Inc.,

v.

No.

Wal-Mart

3:10-cv-03209-JFA
Stores,

Inc.,

No.

3:11-cv-00845-JFA (D.S.C. Aug. 12, 2011).
In

case

numbers

11-2143

and

11-2144,

Boyd

seeks

mandamus relief directing the district court and the magistrate
judge in two of the above cases to provide additional citations
to the record.
requested relief.

We conclude that Boyd is not entitled to the
Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be

used only in extraordinary circumstances; it may not be used as
a substitute for appeal.

Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426

U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509,
516-17 (4th Cir. 2003).

Further, mandamus relief is available

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought.
4

Appeal: 11-1983

Document: 17

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 5 of 5

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.
1988).

Boyd has not met these standards, and therefore, we deny

his petitions for mandamus.
We grant Boyd’s motion to have his “mitigative briefs”
considered

as

his

informal

briefs,

but

deny

his

remaining

motions, including his motion for waiver of service, his motion
to deconsolidate, and his motion to direct the district court to
provide him with a certified copy of the record.

We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court.

Nos. 11-1983, 11-1990, 11-1996, 11-1998:
AFFIRMED
Nos. 11-2143, 11-2144:
PETITION DENIED

5