Filed: Nov. 25, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1756 SHANNON BRIDGET MURPHY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT OF CABELL COUNTY, West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:07-cv-00587) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: November 25, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by un
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1756 SHANNON BRIDGET MURPHY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT OF CABELL COUNTY, West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:07-cv-00587) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: November 25, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unp..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1756 SHANNON BRIDGET MURPHY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CIRCUIT COURT OF CABELL COUNTY, West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:07-cv-00587) Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: November 25, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shannon Bridget Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Shannon Bridget Murphy appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing this civil action for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Murphy v. Circuit Court, No. 3:07-cv- 00587 (S.D.W. Va. June 2, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
