Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Adib Makdessi V., 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    39 views3 pages
    The petitioner, Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order to transfer him from Red Onion State Prison due to alleged abusive and retaliatory actions by prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. The court noted that mandamus is a drastic remedy only used in extraordinary circumstances. It determined that Makdessi did not have a clear right to the relief sought because he had already challenged the underlying issues in a §1983 action in federal district court, which rejected his claims. As mandamus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, and the petition raised issues that could have been pursued in an appeal, the court denied the

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2016-06-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 16-1020

    Original Title

    In Re: Adib Makdessi v., 4th Cir. (2016)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner, Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order to transfer him from Red Onion State Prison due to alleged abusive and retaliatory actions by prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. The court noted that mandamus is a drastic remedy only used in extraordinary circumstances. It determined that Makdessi did not have a clear right to the relief sought because he had already challenged the underlying issues in a §1983 action in federal district court, which rejected his claims. As mandamus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, and the petition raised issues that could have been pursued in an appeal, the court denied the

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    39 views3 pages

    In Re: Adib Makdessi V., 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The petitioner, Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order to transfer him from Red Onion State Prison due to alleged abusive and retaliatory actions by prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied the petition. The court noted that mandamus is a drastic remedy only used in extraordinary circumstances. It determined that Makdessi did not have a clear right to the relief sought because he had already challenged the underlying issues in a §1983 action in federal district court, which rejected his claims. As mandamus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, and the petition raised issues that could have been pursued in an appeal, the court denied the

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 16-1020

    In re:

    ADIB EDDIE RAMEZ MAKDESSI,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (7:13-cv-00079-GEC-PMS;


    7:15-cv-00130-GEC-PMS)

    Submitted:

    May 31, 2016

    Decided:

    June 2, 2016

    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi petitions for a writ of mandamus
    seeking,

    among

    other

    potential

    forms

    of

    relief,

    an

    order

    directing that he be transferred from Red Onion State Prison on


    account

    of

    officials.

    the

    abusive

    We

    conclude

    and

    retaliatory

    that

    Makdessi

    actions
    is

    not

    of

    prison

    entitled

    to

    mandamus relief.
    Mandamus 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, 51617 (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 Assn, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.
    1988).
    Makdessi

    challenged

    the

    conduct

    underlying

    the

    instant

    petitionand sought a transfer from Red Onion State Prisonin a


    42

    U.S.C.

    District

    1983
    Court

    (2012)
    the

    Western

    brought

    in

    States

    Makdessi v. Clarke, No. 7:15-cv-00130-GEC-PMS (W.D. Va.).

    After

    judge

    hearing,

    of

    United

    See

    evidentiary

    District

    the

    Virginia.

    three-day

    for

    action

    the

    magistrate

    recommended rejecting Makdessis claims, and the district court


    subsequently adopted this recommendation.

    Makdessi did not file

    a notice of appeal from the district courts dispositive order,


    which was entered on March 21, 2016.
    2

    Mandamus may not be used

    as a substitute for appeal, In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503


    F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007), and the instant petition raises
    issues that could have beenbut were notpursued in an appeal
    from

    the

    district

    courts

    order.

    petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Accordingly,

    we

    deny

    the

    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.

    PETITION DENIED

    You might also like