Christopher Bailey, IV v. Jan Smokowicz

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998985898-2]. Originating case number: 4:12-cv-00042-RBS-DEM. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999074350]. Mailed to: Christopher Bailey. [12-2255]

Download PDF
Appeal: 12-2255 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/28/2013 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2255 CHRISTOPHER C. BAILEY, IV, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAN SMOKOWICZ, City Attorney; TOM BARRET, Mayor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (4:12-cv-00042-RBS-DEM) Submitted: March 26, 2013 Decided: March 28, 2013 Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher C. Bailey, IV, Appellant Pro Cales, III, FURNISS, DAVIS, RASHKIND & Virginia, for Appellees. Se. James Arthur SAUNDERS, Norfolk, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 12-2255 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/28/2013 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Christopher court’s order granting denying defendants’ (2006) complaint. have C. his to appeals for dismiss the default his 42 district judgment U.S.C. Accordingly, although we pauperis, affirm for and grant the find no reversible leave to proceed reasons stated by the and § 1983 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), (5), (6). record we IV, motion motion the court. reviewed Bailey, We error. in forma district Bailey v. Smokowicz, No. 4:12-cv-00042-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 13, 2012; entered Sept. 14, 2012). We dispense with oral legal contentions are before this and argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials court argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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?