William Davis, Jr. v. Town of Cary North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed- denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000037578-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000031535-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000018889-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000020673-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999829120-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999821596-2]; denying Motion for temporary administrative stay [1000027432-2] Originating case number: 5:08-cv-00176-BO Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000064417]. Mailed to: William Scott Davis, Jr. [16-1377, 16-1378, 16-1380, 16-1381]

Appeal: 16-1377

Doc: 40

Filed: 04/19/2017

Pg: 1 of 5

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1377

WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TOWN OF CARY NORTH CAROLINA; HAROLD WEINBRECHT, Mayor; STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA; WAKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM; PATTI
HEAD; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES;
ALBERT SINGER, Wake County North Carolina County Attorney;
TRIANGLE FAMILY SERVICES; MILES WRIGHT, Interim CEO,
Defendants - Appellees.

No. 16-1378

WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SCOTT L. WILKINSON,
Defendant - Appellee.

No. 16-1380

WAKE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES,
Plaintiff - Appellee,

Appeal: 16-1377

Doc: 40

Filed: 04/19/2017

Pg: 2 of 5

v.
WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II,
Defendant - Appellant.

No. 16-1381

WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II, and (a minor) J.F.D.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JUDGE MONICA M. BOUSMAN, individually and as Juvenile State
Court Judge North Carolina, Wake County; ERICK CHASSE
CHASSE, individually and as a Juvenile State Court Judge,
North Carolina, Wake County; JAMES FULLWOOD, individually
and a Juvenile State Court Judge, North Carolina, Wake
County; ROBERT B. RADAR, individually and as a Juvenile
State Court Judge, North Carolina, Wake County 10th Judicial
District,
Chief
District
Judge;
MARGARET
EAGLES,
individually and a Juvenile of the State of North Carolina,
10th Judicial District; BEVERLY PURDUE, individually and as
Governor of the State of North Carolina; JOHN C. MARTIN,
individually and a Chief Judge of the North Carolina Court
of Appeals and Chief of the N.C. Judicial Standards
Commission,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge.
(5:08-cv-00176-BO; 5:11-cv-00031-BO; 5:12-cv00413-BO; 5:14-cv-00006-BO)

Submitted:

March 7, 2017

Before MOTZ and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Decided:

Circuit

2

Judges,

and

April 19, 2017

DAVIS,

Senior

Appeal: 16-1377

Doc: 40

Filed: 04/19/2017

Pg: 3 of 5

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Scott Davis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

3

Appeal: 16-1377

Doc: 40

Filed: 04/19/2017

Pg: 4 of 5

PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, William Scott Davis, Jr.,
appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for relief
from judgment in four closed civil cases.

We have reviewed the

record and find that these appeals are frivolous.

Accordingly,

we dismiss the appeals for the reasons stated by the district
court.
(E.D.N.C.
motions,

Davis

v.

Feb.

25,

including

Town

of

Cary

2016).
his

We

motions

N.C.,
deny

for

No.

all

stay,

5:08-cv-00176-BO

of

Davis’

for

pending

appointment

of

counsel, and for appointment of a guardian ad litem.
Davis has a long history of filing pro se appeals and other
actions in this court.

He has filed more than 100 such cases

since the beginning of 2014.
yet been granted relief.

In none of these actions has he

On January 27, 2017, by order to show

cause, Davis was ordered to show why he should not be sanctioned
for filing frivolous appeals, motions, and other documents, and
why he should not be enjoined from future filings.
Having reviewed Davis’ response to our order, we find his
arguments

unpersuasive

and

conclude

that

a

prefiling

review

system is warranted in light of Davis’ utter disregard for the
limited resources of this court.
943,

945-46

(4th

Cir.

1997)

See In re Vincent, 105 F.3d

(per

curiam).

Accordingly,

we

enjoin Davis from filing any civil appeal in this court unless a
district

court

judge

has

certified
4

that

the

appeal

is

not

Appeal: 16-1377

Doc: 40

frivolous.

Filed: 04/19/2017

Pg: 5 of 5

We further enjoin Davis, in any civil matter, from

filing any original action, petition, or motion in this court
unless

this

frivolous.

court

has

certified

that

the

filing

is

not

Any document failing to meet these requirements will

be returned to Davis without being placed on the court’s docket.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

5