In re Davis

163 F. App'x 234
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 24, 2006
DocketNo. 05-5204
StatusPublished

This text of 163 F. App'x 234 (In re Davis) 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.

Bluebook
In re Davis, 163 F. App'x 234 (4th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Oran T. Davis petitions for writ of mandamus. He seeks an order directing the district court “to abide by its lawful discretion.” Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

The relief sought by Davis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 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

Related

In Re United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Clc
595 F.2d 958 (Fourth Circuit, 1979)
In Re Diana R. Beard, (Two Cases)
811 F.2d 818 (Fourth Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 F. App'x 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-davis-ca4-2006.