Patrick Parker, Sr. v. Joseph Higgs, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK O. PARKER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOSEPH A. HIGGS, JR., Superintendent; L. WALLACE, Ombudsman; R. WILSON, Mr., Deputy Superintendent; SIMPSON, Sgt., Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00663-REP)
December 15, 2009
December 17, 2009
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patrick O. Parker, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Francuzenko, COOK, KITTS & FRANCUZENKO, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Patrick O. Parker, Sr., appeals a district court order dismissing interference his with civil his rights right to complaint worship. concerning Insofar as alleged Parker
appeals the order granting summary judgment to Simpson, we have reviewed the record and the district court's order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Parker v. Insofar
Higgs, No. 3:06-cv-00663-REP (E.D. Va. June 4, 2009). as Parker appeals prejudice from his the district court against order the
Defendants, a dismissal without prejudice is not reviewable by this court unless the reasons stated for the dismissal clearly disclose defects. that no amendment to the complaint could cure its
See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union Because Parker
392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
could cure the defect in the complaint, we dismiss in part the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional
process. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?