Filed: Nov. 21, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1854 KEVIN C. UMPHREYVILLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, Harrisonburg Division; THE U. S. FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cv-00635-F) Submitted: October 24, 2013 Decided: November 21, 2013 B
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1854 KEVIN C. UMPHREYVILLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, Harrisonburg Division; THE U. S. FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cv-00635-F) Submitted: October 24, 2013 Decided: November 21, 2013 Be..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1854
KEVIN C. UMPHREYVILLE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
VIRGINIA, Harrisonburg Division; THE U. S. FOURTH CIRCUIT
COURT OF APPEALS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:12-cv-00635-F)
Submitted: October 24, 2013 Decided: November 21, 2013
Before WYNN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin C. Umphreyville, Appellant Pro Se. Edward D. Gray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kevin C. Umphreyville appeals the district court’s
order and judgment dismissing his complaint brought pursuant to
the Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. * Umphreyville v. USDC,
WDVA, No. 5:12-cv-00635-F (E.D.N.C. June 12, 2013). 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
*
Although this court has been named as a defendant-appellee
in this action, we exercise our discretion to decide the appeal
pursuant to the Rule of Necessity. United States v. Will,
449
U.S. 200, 211-17,
101 S. Ct. 471,
66 L. Ed. 2d 392 (1980).
2