In Re: Aaron Holsey, Petitioner, 27 F.3d 563 (4th Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 27 F.3d 563 (4th Cir. 1994) Submitted: May 24, 1994. Decided: June 24, 1994

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Aaron Holsey, Petitioner Pro Se.

PETITION DENIED

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:


Aaron Holsey petitions for a writ of mandamus ordering the district court to compel the Defendants in an ongoing matter to provide Holsey with discovery. We deny the petition.

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, available only if other remedies are ineffective to vindicate the petitioner's rights. Further, mandamus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir. 1987); In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). Holsey may, if he chooses, raise the discovery issue on appeal from the final order in the underlying case. The mandamus petition accordingly is denied. As our review of the material before us reveals that it would not aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the petition for a writ of mandamus.

PETITION DENIED

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.