In Re: David Smith, No. 16-2371 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2371 In re: DAVID LEE SMITH, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus Submitted: March 14, 2017 Before FLOYD and Circuit Judge. HARRIS, Decided: Circuit Judges, and March 16, 2017 DAVIS, Senior Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Lee Smith, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: David Lee Smith petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to reopen his civil case, grant him in forma pauperis status, and adjudicate his civil complaint. We conclude that Smith 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 (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 Smith is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny Smith’s motion for an en banc determination and deny the petition for writ of mandamus. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before We dispense with contentions this court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.