Case ID: f-appx_712/html/0304-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE: Daniel Johnson WILLIS, Petitioner. In re: Daniel Johnson Willis, Petitioner.
    No. 17-2119, No. 17-2207
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: February 22, 2018
    Decided: February 26, 2018
    Daniel Johnson Willis, Petitioner Pro Se.
    • Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Daniel Johnson Willis petitions for writs of mandamus seeking orders directing the district court to adjudicate civil rights actions that the court denied Willis leave to file pursuant to a prefiling injunction. We conclude that Willis is not entitled to mandamus relief.

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, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (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. 1988).

Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by Willis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petitions and supplemental petitions for writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITIONS DENIED