From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sirleaf v. John

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 27, 2019
No. 19-6521 (4th Cir. Sep. 27, 2019)

Opinion

No. 19-6521 No. 19-6801

09-27-2019

PRIEST MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARBARA MEIKLEJOHN; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. PRIEST MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; MARYLAND; UNKNOWN JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; BARBARA MEIKLEJOHN, Head Clerk of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Maryland; UNKNOWN CLERK(S) OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; UNKNOWN CLERKS(S) OF THE MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS; UNKNOWN CLERK(S) OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF MARYLAND, GREENBELT DIVISION; FEDERAL MAGISTRATE RODERICK C. YOUNG, U.S.D.C.E.D.VA; SENIOR JUDGE HENRY HUDSON, U.S.D.C.E.D.VA; JUDGE HANNAH M. LAUCK, U.S.D.C.E.D.VA; UNKNOWN CLERK(S) OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Defendants - Appellees.

Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge; Roderick Charles Young, Magistrate Judge. (3:18-cv-00562-REP) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order on a pretrial matter under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (2012) (No. 19-6521) and appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) (No. 19-6801). We dismiss the appeal from the magistrate judge's order for lack of jurisdiction, but we have considered Sirleaf's appeal arguments to the extent that the district court has affirmed or adopted the challenged rulings. As for Sirleaf's appeal of the district court's final order, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sirleaf v. Meiklejohn, No. 3:18-cv-00562-REP (E.D. Va. May 24, 2019). 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.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART


Summaries of

Sirleaf v. John

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 27, 2019
No. 19-6521 (4th Cir. Sep. 27, 2019)
Case details for

Sirleaf v. John

Case Details

Full title:PRIEST MOMOLU V.S. SIRLEAF, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BARBARA…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Sep 27, 2019

Citations

No. 19-6521 (4th Cir. Sep. 27, 2019)