In re: William Davis, Jr., No. 20-2233 (4th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-2233 In re: WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., Petitioner. No. 20-2241 In re: WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., Petitioner. On Petitions for Writ of Mandamus. (2:17-cv-00007-JPB-RWT) Submitted: April 27, 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 Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: April 30, 2021 PER CURIAM: William Scott Davis, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order dissolving a prefiling injunction entered by the district court. 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 and deny Davis’ motions to order the district court to respond to his petitions. 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
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.
