Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Juliet Wright v. James City County, 15-2116 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 15-2116 Visitors: 43
Filed: Dec. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2116 JULIET WRIGHT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES CITY COUNTY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (4:12-cv-00153-RBS-LRL) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2116 JULIET WRIGHT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES CITY COUNTY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (4:12-cv-00153-RBS-LRL) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Juliet Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Allison Anne Kotula, JAMES CITY COUNTY ATTORNEY, Williamsburg, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Juliet Wright appeals the district court’s order denying her motion to disqualify the trial judge and magistrate judge and her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. With respect to Wright’s motion to disqualify, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm that portion of the district court’s order for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wright v. James City Cnty., No. 4:12-cv-00153-RBS- LRL (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 21, 2015, entered Aug. 24, 2015). With respect to the denial of Wright’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, we confine our appellate review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s informal opening brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wright’s informal opening brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s denial of her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, Wright has forfeited appellate review of that portion of the court’s order. Wright’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 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