William Peterson v. Jack Peterson


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00038-AJT-TCB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000166646]. Mailed to: William Peterson. [17-1443]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1443 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1443 WILLIAM JOHN PETERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JACK RICHARD PETERSON; BEAUMONT COMPANIES, INC., Defendants - Appellees, and THOMAS DENNIS PETERSON; THOMAS D. PETERSON, LLC, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00038-AJT-TCB) Submitted: September 21, 2017 Decided: October 3, 2017 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William John Peterson, Appellant Pro Se. Miriam Rose Epstein, Tania M. L. Saylor, PETERSON SAYLOR, PLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees. Appeal: 17-1443 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 17-1443 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/03/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: William John Peterson appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Peterson’s civil action. In its dispositive order, the district court explained that it granted the motion to dismiss for the reasons expressed at the motion hearing, but the record does not contain a transcript of that hearing. An appellant has the burden of including in the record on appeal a transcript of all parts of the proceedings material to the issues raised on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); 4th Cir. R. 10(c). By failing to produce a transcript of the motion hearing, Peterson has waived review of the issues on appeal that depend upon the transcript to show error. See generally Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Keller v. Prince George’s Cty., 827 F.2d 952, 954 n.1 (4th Cir. 1987). As no error appears on the record before us, we affirm the district court’s order. 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 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?