Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Myer v. Cooke, 05-1846 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1846 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 25, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1846 SUSAN T. MYER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BOOSE; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS; JAMES COOKE, JR., individually and in his official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-04-258-5) Submitted: August 9, 2006 Decided: August 25, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1846 SUSAN T. MYER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAROLYN BOOSE; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS; JAMES COOKE, JR., individually and in his official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-04-258-5) Submitted: August 9, 2006 Decided: August 25, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Susan T. Myer, Appellant Pro Se. Bryce Denman Neier, LAW OFFICE OF BRYCE D. NEIER, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Susan T. Myer appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and denying her motion to alter or amend the judgment. Myer’s federal complaint has its genesis in a real estate sale that was part of state divorce and equitable distribution proceedings. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Myer v. Cooke, No. CA-04-258-5 (E.D.N.C. June 29, 2005). 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer