Juliet Wright v. James City County

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999684157-2] Originating case number: 4:12-cv-00153-RBS-LRL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999722188]. Mailed to: Juliet Wright. [15-2116]

Appeal: 15-2116

Doc: 13

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2116

JULIET WRIGHT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES CITY COUNTY,
Defendant - Appellee.

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-00153-RBS-LRL)

Submitted:

December 17, 2015

Decided:

December 21, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Juliet Wright, Appellant Pro Se.
Allison Anne Kotula, JAMES
CITY COUNTY ATTORNEY, Williamsburg, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2116

Doc: 13

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Juliet Wright appeals the district court’s order denying
her motion to disqualify the trial judge and magistrate judge
and her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion.

With respect to Wright’s

motion to disqualify, we have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm that portion of the

district court’s order for the reasons stated by the district
court.

See Wright v. James City Cnty., No. 4:12-cv-00153-RBS-

LRL (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 21, 2015, entered Aug. 24, 2015).
With respect to the denial of Wright’s Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b)

motion,

we

confine

our

appellate

review

to

raised in the Appellant’s informal opening brief.
R.

34(b).

Because

Wright’s

informal

opening

the

issues

See 4th Cir.

brief

does

not

challenge the basis for the district court’s denial of her Fed.
R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, Wright has forfeited appellate review
of

that

portion

of

the

court’s

order.

Wright’s

motion

for

appointment of counsel is denied.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

2