In re: Anthony Cook v. n
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion to procced in forma pauperis granted. Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) and other pending motions denied [999941769-2]; [999994341-2]; [999945827-2]. Originating case number: 4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000026503]. Mailed to: Anthony Cook, Lawrence Crawford, David Duren and Yahya Muquit. [16-2141]
Appeal: 16-2141
Doc: 31
Filed: 02/21/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2141
In re:
ANTHONY COOK; DAVID DUREN; YAHYA MUQUIT; LAWRENCE
CRAWFORD,
Petitioners.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
Submitted:
February 16, 2017
(4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER)
Decided:
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
DUNCAN,
February 21, 2017
Circuit
Judge,
and
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Cook, David
Petitioners Pro Se.
Duren,
Yahya
Muquit,
Lawrence
Crawford,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-2141
Doc: 31
Filed: 02/21/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
seek
forms
PER CURIAM:
Petitioners
including
writs
Petitioners
of
also
several
mandamus
seek
to
against
proceed
of
mandamus
multiple
in
forma
relief,
federal
pauperis
judges.
and
have
filed motions for a ruling of law, for recusal, and for this
court
to
reconsider
its
previous
orders
in
this
and
related
appeals.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only
in extraordinary circumstances.
Kerr v. U.S. 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.
In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.
1988).
We
have
reviewed
Petitioners
not
filings
conclude
that
extraordinary
circumstances exist warranting mandamus relief.
To the extent
challenge
the
established
and
that
Petitioners
have
Petitioners’
district
court’s
rulings
in
their
respective district court actions, or this court’s prior orders,
mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
In re
Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
to
the
judges
extent
of
this
participation
Petitioners
court
in
be
their
ask
that
ordered
district
to
respective
2
court
recuse
actions
judges
themselves
or
And
or
from
appeals,
Appeal: 16-2141
Doc: 31
Filed: 02/21/2017
Pg: 3 of 3
Petitioners have not established extra-judicial bias.
See In re
Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, although we grant Petitioners’ applications to
proceed
in
Petitioners’
forma
pauperis,
other
pending
we
deny
motions.
mandamus
We
dispense
relief
and
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.
PETITION DENIED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?