Court Opinion

ID: 4682957
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-04-30 19:00:53.184737+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:42.901906
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                       No. 20-2230

In re: WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.,

                     Petitioner.

                                       No. 20-2242

In re: WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.,

                     Petitioner.

                On Petitions for Writ of Mandamus. (5:16-hc-02211-BA)

Submitted: April 27, 2021                                         Decided: April 30, 2021

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Scott Davis, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       William Scott Davis, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order

declaring the district court’s orders void. We conclude that Davis is not entitled to

mandamus relief.

       Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary

circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown,

LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when

the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795.

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 Davis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we

deny the petitions for a 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

                                            2