Filed: Sep. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1086 MARVA LASHALLE AUSTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE INSURANCE COMPANY (GEICO), Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00744-AWA-LRL) Submitted: August 14, 2018 Decided: September 4, 2018 Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by un
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1086 MARVA LASHALLE AUSTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE INSURANCE COMPANY (GEICO), Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00744-AWA-LRL) Submitted: August 14, 2018 Decided: September 4, 2018 Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unp..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1086 MARVA LASHALLE AUSTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE INSURANCE COMPANY (GEICO), Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00744-AWA-LRL) Submitted: August 14, 2018 Decided: September 4, 2018 Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marva L. Austin, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marva L. Austin appeals the district court’s order denying in part for lack of subject matter jurisdiction her motion for clarification regarding the court’s attorney appointment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Austin v. Gov’t Emp. Ins. Co. (GEICO), No. 2:16-cv-00744-AWA-LRL (E.D. Va. Dec. 21, 2017). We grant Austin’s motion to seal and 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 2
