Richard Polidi v. Cheshire Parker Schneider

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000163352]. Mailed to: Richard Polidi. [17-1122, 17-1124]

Appeal: 17-1122

Doc: 16

Filed: 09/28/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1122
RICHARD POLIDI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CHESHIRE PARKER SCHNEIDER & BRYAN, PLLC; ALAN SCHNEIDER;
JOHN DOES 1-3,
Defendants - Appellees.

No. 17-1124
RICHARD POLIDI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CARMEN HOYME BANNON, in each of her official and individual capacities;
DOUGLAS BELL,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, an Agency of the State of North
Carolina; WAYNE TRUAX, in each of his official and individual capacities;
KATHERINE JEAN, in each of her official and individual capacities; JOHN
DOES 1-10; JOHN DOES 1-5,
Defendants.

Appeal: 17-1122

Doc: 16

Filed: 09/28/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN; 1:16-cv01535-TSE-MSN)

Submitted: September 26, 2017

Decided: September 28, 2017

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Polidi, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 17-1122

Doc: 16

Filed: 09/28/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Richard Polidi appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983,
1985 (2012) complaints under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and denying his Motion
to Set Aside Order and for a New Hearing. * We have reviewed the records and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Polidi v. Cheshire Parker Schneider & Bryan, PLLC, No. 1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN
(E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2016; Jan. 25, 2017); Polidi v. Bannon, No. 1:16-cv-01535-TSE-MSN
(E.D. Va. Dec. 28, 2016; filed Dec. 29, 2016 & entered Dec. 30, 2016). 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

*

The district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over Polidi’s state law claims,
dismissing them without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) (2012).

3