In re Hudson
This text of 585 F. App'x 198 (In re Hudson) 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Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Detrine Hudson has filed petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed processing a notice of appeal he filed in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court docketed the notice of appeal and forwarded it to this court. Accordingly, because the district court has recently acted, we deny the mandamus petitions as moot. 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.
PETITION DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
585 F. App'x 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hudson-ca4-2014.