Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: McEvily V., 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    Michael McEvily filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court denied the petition, finding that the delay was not unreasonable, but did so without prejudice in case McEvily files another petition if the district court does not act expeditiously. The petition was denied by an unpublished per curiam opinion of a three-judge panel of the appeals court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-07-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6518

    Original Title

    In Re: McEvily v., 4th Cir. (2003)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Michael McEvily filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court denied the petition, finding that the delay was not unreasonable, but did so without prejudice in case McEvily files another petition if the district court does not act expeditiously. The petition was denied by an unpublished per curiam opinion of a three-judge panel of the appeals court.

    Copyright:

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

    In Re: McEvily V., 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Michael McEvily filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court denied the petition, finding that the delay was not unreasonable, but did so without prejudice in case McEvily files another petition if the district court does not act expeditiously. The petition was denied by an unpublished per curiam opinion of a three-judge panel of the appeals court.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-6518

    In Re:

    MICHAEL MCEVILY,
    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

    Submitted:

    June 23, 2003

    (CA-01-297-7)

    Decided:

    July 11, 2003

    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Michael McEvily, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael McEvily petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the
    district court has unduly delayed acting on his 42 U.S.C. 1983
    (2000) complaint.

    He seeks an order from this court directing the

    district court to act.

    Although we find that mandamus relief is

    not warranted because the delay is not unreasonable, we deny the


    mandamus petition without prejudice to the filing of another
    mandamus petition if the district court does not act expeditiously.
    We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

    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

    You might also like