Jermaine Capel v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:15-cv-00227-AWA-LRL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999787773]. Mailed to: Jermaine Capel 600 Creamer Road Norfolk, VA 23503. [15-2039]
Appeal: 15-2039
Doc: 7
Filed: 04/04/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2039
JERMAINE CAPEL,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; NORFOLK JUVENILE AND
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DISTRICT COURT; CHESAPEAKE JUVENILE AND
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DISTRICT COURT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:15-cv—00227-AWA-LRL)
Submitted:
February 23, 2016
Decided:
April 4, 2016
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jermaine Capel, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-2039
Doc: 7
Filed: 04/04/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Jermaine
Capel
appeals
the
district
court’s
order
dismissing without prejudice his civil complaint challenging the
calculation of his child support payments.
For the reasons set
forth below, we affirm.
Although
the
district
court
dismissed
the
complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012) for failure to
state a claim on which relief may be granted after Capel failed
to cure the identified deficiencies in his complaint, we find
that no amendment to the complaint in this case would have cured
the
fact
that
jurisdiction.
2006)
(noting
the
district
court
lacked
subject
matter
See Cantor v. Cohen, 442 F.3d 196, 202 (4th Cir.
“the
long
established
precedent
that
federal
courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and generally abstain
from hearing child custody matters”).
Moreover, the record reveals that the Chesapeake Juvenile
and Domestic Relations District Court ordered Capel in December
2014 to pay $4620.18 in arrears to support his son.
Because
Capel appears to be seeking review of this state court order in
federal court, his action is barred under the Rooker-Feldman *
doctrine.
*
D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983);
Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923).
2
Appeal: 15-2039
Doc: 7
We
Filed: 04/04/2016
therefore
affirm
the
Pg: 3 of 3
district
court’s
order
on
the
ground that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider Capel’s
claims.
legal
before
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.
AFFIRMED
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?