In Re: David Smith
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999979162-2]; denying Motion for initial hearing en banc (FRAP 35) [1000022895-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999979159-2]. Originating case number: 5:16-ct-03229-BO Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: David Smith. [16-2371]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
DAVID LEE SMITH,
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
March 14, 2017
Before FLOYD and
March 16, 2017
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Lee Smith, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
David Lee Smith petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an
order directing the district court to reopen his civil case,
grant him in forma pauperis status, and adjudicate his civil
We conclude that Smith is not entitled to mandamus
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.
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
The relief sought by Smith is not available by way of mandamus.
Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we deny Smith’s motion for an en banc determination
and deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
We dispense with
argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?