Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Rivera V., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    Vincent Rivera filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have the district court accept his complaint for filing and challenging the validity of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. Mandamus relief is only available when there is a clear right to the relief sought, which Rivera did not have. Additionally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Therefore, the court concluded that the relief Rivera sought was not available through mandamus and denied the petition.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-11-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7608

    Original Title

    In re: Rivera v., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Vincent Rivera filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have the district court accept his complaint for filing and challenging the validity of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. Mandamus relief is only available when there is a clear right to the relief sought, which Rivera did not have. Additionally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Therefore, the court concluded that the relief Rivera sought was not available through mandamus and denied the petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    0 views2 pages

    In Re: Rivera V., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Vincent Rivera filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have the district court accept his complaint for filing and challenging the validity of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. Mandamus relief is only available when there is a clear right to the relief sought, which Rivera did not have. Additionally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Therefore, the court concluded that the relief Rivera sought was not available through mandamus and denied the petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-7608

    In Re:

    VINCENT F. RIVERA,
    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

    Submitted: November 15, 2006

    Decided:

    November 27, 2006

    Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Vincent F. Rivera, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Vincent F. Rivera petitions for a writ of mandamus
    seeking

    an

    order

    directing

    the

    district

    court

    to

    accept

    his

    complaint for filing and challenging the validity of 28 U.S.C.


    1915 (2000), which was amended by the Prison Litigation Reform
    Act.

    We conclude that Rivera 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

    Assn, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).


    drastic

    remedy

    circumstances.

    and

    should

    only

    be

    Further, mandamus is a
    used

    in

    extraordinary

    Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,

    402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
    Additionally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
    In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
    The relief sought by Rivera is not available by way of
    mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
    pauperis, we deny Riveras motion objecting to the terms of the
    Prison Litigation Reform Act and deny the petition for writ of
    mandamus.

    Riveras motion to expedite is denied as moot.

    We

    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    PETITION DENIED

    - 2 -

    You might also like