In Re: Alfred Thoma, No. 10-1320 (4th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1320 In Re: Litem, ALFRED T. THOMAS; RANDY L. THOMAS, As Guardian Ad Petitioners. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: April 29, 2010 (3:06-cv-00238-GCM) Decided: May 4, 2010 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alfred T. Thomas, Randy L. Thomas, Petitioners Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alfred T. Thomas, through his Guardian Ad Litem, Randy L. Thomas, petitions reconsideration affirming the of a order, custody decree. for a district as well writ court as of order an order mandamus and our vacating seeking opinion a child We conclude that Thomas is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Cir. Ass n, mandamus 860 is a F.2d drastic 135, 138 remedy extraordinary circumstances. (4th and should 1988). Further, only used be in Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and does not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983). The relief sought by Thomas is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 2 We deny Thomas motion to enjoin new defendant and dispense with oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before contentions the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3

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.