Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Maurice Cumberlander v. King George County Circuit Court, 14-7752 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-7752 Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7752 MAURICE L. CUMBERLANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KING GEORGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, Municipality; JENNIFER POLLARD, Assistant Commonwealth Attorney for “Municipality”; VERONICA CROMER, Court Appointed Public Defender for the Public Defender’s Office; MATTHEW BRITTON, Commonwealth Attorney for the “Municipality”; TERESA PAGLIARO, Court Appointed Attorney of the Pagliaro Law Firm; JANE FLETCHER, Virginia State Bar Deput
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 14-7752


MAURICE L. CUMBERLANDER,

                Plaintiff - Appellant,

          v.

KING GEORGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, Municipality; JENNIFER
POLLARD, Assistant Commonwealth Attorney for “Municipality”;
VERONICA CROMER, Court Appointed Public Defender for the
Public Defender’s Office; MATTHEW BRITTON, Commonwealth
Attorney for the “Municipality”; TERESA PAGLIARO, Court
Appointed Attorney of the Pagliaro Law Firm; JANE FLETCHER,
Virginia State Bar Deputy Intake Counsel,

                Defendants - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.    Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-01278-CMH-JFA)


Submitted:   March 17, 2015                 Decided:   March 20, 2015


Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Maurice L. Cumberlander, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

      Maurice L. Cumberlander appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012).          We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error.       Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by   the   district     court.      Cumberlander      v.    King    George    Cnty.

Circuit    Court,   No.    1:14-cv-01278-CMH-JFA           (E.D.    Va.    Nov.   12,

2014).      We   deny   Cumberlander’s       motion   for    injunctive      relief

pending appeal as moot.          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




                                       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