In re: Natalie A. Tao

In re Tao · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 18, 2026 · No. 25-2096

Summary

The Fourth Circuit denied Natalie A. Tao’s petition for a writ of mandamus arising from her voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy case. The court held that dismissal of the bankruptcy petition rendered much of the requested relief moot and that the remaining relief was unavailable by mandamus because Tao lacked a clear right to relief and mandamus could not substitute for an appeal.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; King; Richardson; Quattlebaum
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decision date
February 18, 2026
Docket number
25-2096
Procedural posture
Petition for a writ of mandamus arising from a voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding.
Standard of review
Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy available only when the petitioner has a clear and indisputable right to relief and no other adequate means of obtaining it; mandamus may not substitute for an appeal.
Precedential value
Unpublished and nonbinding precedent in the Fourth Circuit.
Parties
Natalie A. Tao
Disposition
writ_denied

Topics

writ of certiorariappellate proceduremootnesschapter 13bankruptcy

Practice areas

BankruptcyAppellate procedureMandamusDisability access

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Tao demonstrated entitlement to a writ of mandamus directing the bankruptcy court, trustee, or other parties to take the requested actions.
  2. Whether dismissal of Tao's Chapter 13 petition under 11 U.S.C. § 521(i)(1) rendered much of the requested mandamus relief moot.
  3. Whether Tao's request for a stay of collection or enforcement proceedings should be granted.

Holdings

  1. The dismissal of Tao's voluntary Chapter 13 petition under 11 U.S.C. § 521(i)(1) rendered much of the relief she sought moot.
  2. Tao was not entitled to mandamus relief because mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal and she failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief.
  3. Tao's motion for a stay was denied as moot.

Key quotations

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances.
Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner “has a clear and indisputable right to” the relief she seeks and “has no other adequate means . . . to attain the desired relief.”
mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal

Factual background

Tao commenced a voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy case in the District of Maryland. She sought mandamus relief directing the bankruptcy trustee and others to take or refrain from taking various actions, including crediting plan payments, preserving and reconstructing documents, providing ADA-compliant access, recovering assets, and avoiding retaliation. The bankruptcy court dismissed her petition under 11 U.S.C. § 521(i)(1), which rendered much of the requested relief moot.

Procedural history

Tao filed a voluntary Chapter 13 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. She petitioned the Fourth Circuit for mandamus relief seeking multiple orders concerning the bankruptcy trustee, plan payments, documents, ADA access, assets, participation by certain parties, and alleged retaliation, and also sought a stay of collection or enforcement proceedings. The bankruptcy court dismissed the voluntary Chapter 13 petition under 11 U.S.C. § 521(i)(1). The Fourth Circuit denied the mandamus petition and denied the motion for a stay as moot.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…