Leanora Nelson v. Levy Center LLC

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 9:11-cv-01184-SB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999982217]. Mailed to: L Nelson. [16-1484]

Appeal: 16-1484

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/07/2016

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1484

LEANORA NELSON; SELENA NELSON CECCHINI, Natural Daughter
and Heir at Law of Rosalind Nelson deceased; JEAN NELSON
LUMSBY,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
LEVY CENTER LLC,
Defendant - Appellee,
v.
HORACE JONES; THE LAW OFFICES OF HORACE JONES; THE WILCY R.
NELSON FAMILY, LLC,
Third Party Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort.
Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (9:11-cv-01184-SB)

Submitted:

October 31, 2016

Decided:

December 7, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leanora Nelson, Selena Nelson Cecchini, Jean Nelson Lumsby,
Appellants Pro Se.
Demetri K. Koutrakos, Louis H. Lang,

Appeal: 16-1484

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/07/2016

Pg: 2 of 4

CALLISON, TIGHE & ROBINSON, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-1484

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/07/2016

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Leanora

Nelson,

Selena

Nelson

Cecchini,

and

Jean

Nelson

Lumsby (collectively, “the Nelsons”) appeal from the district
court’s

order

adopting

the

recommendations

of

the

magistrate

judge and granting summary judgment in their civil action to
Defendant Levy Center LLC.

The district court determined that

dismissal of certain of the Nelsons’ claims was warranted under
the

Rooker-Feldman 1

doctrine

and

that

the

entire

action

barred under the applicable statute of limitations.

was

We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district
court’s determination that the Nelsons’ action was barred by the
applicable

statute

of

limitations.

We

district court’s judgment on this basis. 2

therefore

affirm

the

Nelson v. Levy Ctr.

LLC, No. 9:11-cv-01184-SB (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 2016).

1

D.C. Ct. App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v.
Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923).
2

After the district court issued its judgment, this court
issued an opinion clarifying the scope of the Rooker-Feldman
doctrine.
Thana v. Bd. of License Comm’rs for Charles Cty.,
Md., 827 F.3d 314 (4th Cir. 2016). Because we affirm here on an
alternate basis, we find it unnecessary to consider whether the
district court’s Rooker-Feldman analysis comports with Thana.
We also reject as without merit the Nelsons’ appellate arguments
suggestive of potential bias by the district court and
suggesting that the court erred by considering matters not cited
by Levy Center LLC in its summary judgment motion.

3

Appeal: 16-1484

Doc: 17

Filed: 12/07/2016

Pg: 4 of 4

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

4