In re Smith

Fourth Circuit

In re Smith

201 F. App'x 928

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 3, 2006·No. No. 06-7075·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Richard Allen Smith, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on two motions for relief pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Although we find that mandamus relief is not warranted because the delay is not unreasonable, we deny the mandamus petition without prejudice to the filing of another mandamus petition if the district court does not act expeditiously. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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

PER CURIAM:

Richard Allen Smith, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on two motions for relief pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Although we find that mandamus relief is not warranted because the delay is not unreasonable, we deny the mandamus petition without prejudice to the filing of another mandamus petition if the district court does not act expeditiously. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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.

In re Smith, 201 F. App'x 928 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

201 F. App'x 928 (In re Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.