Filed: Oct. 20, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1917 ROBERT LOVE TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. STATE OF VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; ELAINE JACKSON KERNS, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00803-LMB-TCB) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 20, 2010 Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed b
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1917 ROBERT LOVE TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. STATE OF VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; ELAINE JACKSON KERNS, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00803-LMB-TCB) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 20, 2010 Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1917 ROBERT LOVE TAYLOR, JR., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. STATE OF VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT; ELAINE JACKSON KERNS, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00803-LMB-TCB) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 20, 2010 Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Love Taylor, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert Love Taylor, Jr. appeals the district court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of mandamus show cause. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Taylor v. State of Va. Div. of Child Support Enforcement, No. 1:10-cv-00803-LMB-TCB (E.D. Va. July 22, 2010). 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
