Alonzo Copeland, Jr. v. J. Shrom / RN

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:13-cv-00584-RBS-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999495904]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-7044]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7044 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/18/2014 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7044 ALONZO DENNIS COPELAND, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. SHROM/RN, Registered Nurse; A. FREEMAN, Registered Nurse; C/O CLARK, Lieutenant; ESTATE OF DOCTOR WARREN, Defendants - Appellees, and MS. MASSENBURG, ex. Institutional Ombudsman; MS. C. BOONE, ex. Institutional Ombudsman; MR. R. WOODSON, Regional Ombudsman; DOCTOR WARREN, Physician/Doctor, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (2:13-cv-00584-RBS-DEM) Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: Before SHEDD, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. December 18, 2014 Appeal: 14-7044 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/18/2014 Pg: 2 of 3 Alonzo Dennis Copeland, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 14-7044 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/18/2014 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Alonzo Dennis Copeland, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint as time-barred. The district court has granted Copeland’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion, vacated its dismissed order, and the complaint reinstated. moot. legal before Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?