Filed: Jun. 24, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1203 DONALD VAN METER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHERINE VAN METER; BARBARA GREIG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-03-104) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 24, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Van Meter, Appell
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1203 DONALD VAN METER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHERINE VAN METER; BARBARA GREIG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-03-104) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 24, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Van Meter, Appella..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1203 DONALD VAN METER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHERINE VAN METER; BARBARA GREIG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-03-104) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 24, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Van Meter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donald Van Meter appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Van Meter v. Van Meter, No. CA-03-104 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 31, 2003; entered Feb. 3, 2003). 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
