Filed: Feb. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1735 GLENN MYER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SUSAN STONEY; COUNTY OF FAIRFAX GOVERNMENT; SHARON BULOVA, Chairman of County of Fairfax; HON. MICHAEL JOSEPH CASSIDY, Presiding Judge, Chief Judge; OMAR MERCEDES; CHRISTOPHER BARR; TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT, Fairfax County Courthouse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Ju
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1735 GLENN MYER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SUSAN STONEY; COUNTY OF FAIRFAX GOVERNMENT; SHARON BULOVA, Chairman of County of Fairfax; HON. MICHAEL JOSEPH CASSIDY, Presiding Judge, Chief Judge; OMAR MERCEDES; CHRISTOPHER BARR; TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT, Fairfax County Courthouse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Jud..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1735
GLENN MYER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SUSAN STONEY; COUNTY OF FAIRFAX GOVERNMENT; SHARON
BULOVA, Chairman of County of Fairfax; HON. MICHAEL JOSEPH CASSIDY,
Presiding Judge, Chief Judge; OMAR MERCEDES; CHRISTOPHER BARR;
TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT, Fairfax County Courthouse,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00722-LMB-MSN)
Submitted: December 28, 2018 Decided: February 8, 2019
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Glenn Myer, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Glenn Myer appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1985
(2012) action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. While the district court may have erred in concluding that
Myer’s claim against Christopher Barr was barred by quasijudicial immunity, see
McCray v. Maryland,
456 F.2d 1, 4 (4th Cir. 1972) (holding that quasi-judicial immunity
does not extend to clerk’s performance of “required ministerial act[s] such as properly
filing papers”), its conclusion that Myer failed to allege that Barr conspired to violate
Myer’s civil rights is well-supported. The district court also erroneously determined that
the County of Fairfax Government (“the County”) was not subject to suit. See Va. Code
Ann. § 15.2-1404 (2018) (“Every locality may sue or be sued in its own name in relation
to all matters connected with its duties.”). But, the court properly found that Myer did
not sufficiently allege that the County was involved in a conspiracy to violate his civil
rights. With respect to the remainder of Myer’s claims, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Myer v. Stoney, No. 1:18-cv-00722-LMB-MSN (E.D. Va. June 21,
2018). We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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