In Re: Shaheen Cabbagestalk, No. 15-1849 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1849 In re: SHAHEEN CABBAGESTALK, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shaheen Cabbagestalk, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Shaheen Cabbagestalk petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to reinstate two of his civil actions. We conclude that Cabbagestalk 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 Cabbagestalk 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. deny all of Cabbagestalk’s pending motions. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before We 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.
