In re Brinson
This text of 459 F. App'x 283 (In re Brinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Eugene Kenneth Brinson petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed acting on his post-judgment motions. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We conclude that there has been no undue delay in the district court. Therefore, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition without prejudice to the filing of another mandamus petition if the district court does not act expeditiously on the pending post-judgment motions. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
459 F. App'x 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-brinson-ca4-2011.