Filed: Jan. 31, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2963 In Re: CHRIS J. EUBANKS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-95-117) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: January 31, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chris J. Eubanks, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Chris J. Eubanks pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2963 In Re: CHRIS J. EUBANKS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-95-117) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: January 31, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chris J. Eubanks, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Chris J. Eubanks pet..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2963
In Re: CHRIS J. EUBANKS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-95-117)
Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: January 31, 1996
Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chris J. Eubanks, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Chris J. Eubanks petitions this court for a writ of mandamus
pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 21, requesting that we direct a dis-
trict court judge to enter a default judgment against the Defen-
dants in Eubanks's pending civil rights action.
Mandamus is an extraordinary writ that should be granted only
in unusual circumstances not present here. Kerr v. United States
District Court,
426 U.S. 394 (1976). Further, it cannot be used as
a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers,
595 F.2d 958,
960 (4th Cir. 1979). Accordingly, we deny Eubanks's petition for
writ of mandamus. 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