Rickey Young v. Steve Draper

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to reconsider [1000058831-2]; denying Motion to expedite decision [1000020096-2] Originating case number: 4:17-cv-00001-JLK Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000097994]. Mailed to: R Young. [17-1184]

Appeal: 17-1184

Doc: 38

Filed: 06/09/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1184

RICKEY G. YOUNG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STEVE DRAPER, Sheriff; CHIEF SEAN DUNN, Martinsville Police Department;
SGT/DEPUTY PETERS; NANCY HYLTON, and others,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:17-cv-00001-JLK)

Submitted: May 30, 2017

Decided: June 9, 2017

Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rickey G. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Nathan Henry Schnetzler, FRITH, ANDERSON &
PEAKE, PC, Roanoke, Virginia; Jennifer Dillow Royer, GUYNN & WADDELL P.C.,
Salem, Virginia; Amy Miles Kowalski, Chad Allan Mooney, PETTY, LIVINGSTON,
DAWSON & RICHARDS, Lynchburg, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-1184

Doc: 38

Filed: 06/09/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Rickey G. Young appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a
preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1)

(2012). While this interlocutory appeal was pending, Young voluntarily dismissed his
civil action in the district court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). We therefore
dismiss Young’s appeal as moot. See CVLR Performance Horses, Inc. v. Wynne, 792
F.3d 469, 474 (4th Cir. 2015) (“Litigation may become moot during the pendency of an
appeal when an intervening event makes it impossible for the court to grant effective
relief to the prevailing party.”).

We also deny as moot Young’s motion for

reconsideration of this court’s order denying injunctive relief pending appeal, and we
deny Young’s motion to expedite decision. 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.
DISMISSED

2