DELTA WALSH, Individually v. Dewain Mackey

12-2024Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit15.11.2012

Gesamter Gesetzestext

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2024
DELTA WALSH, Individually, and on behalf of her minor
children, to-wit; R.M.; R.W.; W.W.; R.K.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
DEWAIN MACKEY, and Madison County Planning/Zoning Board, in
his official capacity as Vice-Chairman; MADISON COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD; MACKEY FARMS; MADISON COUNTY SCHOOL
DISTRICT; KATHY PARKER MACKEY, and Mackey Farm and Madison
County School District, in her individual and professional
capacities; KATHY RAY, in her individual capacity and in her
official capacity as Paralegal for the Twenty-Fourth
Prosecutorial District; GERALD WILSON, in his individual
capacity, and in his official capacity as Chief District
Attorney for the Twenty-Fourth Prosecutorial District;
ALEXANDER LYERLY, in his individual capacity, and in his
official as Chief District Court Judge for the Twenty-Fourth
Judicial District; SAMUEL E. PARKER, in his individual
capacity, and in his official capacity as Madison County
Magistrate; RONALD WILCOX, and the Madison County School
District, in his individual capacity, and in his
professional capacity as Superintendent for Madison County
School District; ROBERT DAVIDSON, and Madison County Animal
Control, in his individual capacity, and in his official
capacity as former Director for Madison County Animal
Control; MADISON COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL; SAM LUNSFORD, and
Madison County Animal Control, in his individual capacity,
and in his official capacity as Director for Madison County
Animal Control; JAMES HARWOOD, and Madison County Sheriff’s
Department, in his individual capacity, and in his official
capacity as Madison County Sheriff; MADISON COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT; GEORGE COLE, in his individual capacity, and in
his official capacity as (former) Detective for the Madison
County Sheriff’s Department; JOHN LEDFORD, and Madison
County Sheriff’s Department, in his individual capacity, and
in his official capacity as (former) Madison County Sheriff;

-- 1 of 3 --

2
LAMONA BANKS LEDFORD, in her individual capacity, and in her
professional capacity as owner/operator of Scott Banks
Trucking Company; JOHN DOES, as yet unknown and others
unnamed; DEWAIN MACKEY, and Mackey Farm and Madison County
School District, in his individual and professional
capacities,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
JANE DOES,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (1:11-cv-00321-MR-DCK)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Delta Walsh, Appellant Pro Se. Larry Leake, LEAKE & SCOTT,
Asheville, North Carolina; Andrew B. Parker, LONG, PARKER &
WARREN, P.A., Asheville, North Carolina; Brian David Elston,
Karl Dean Shatley, II, CAMPBELL SHATLEY, PLLC, Asheville, North
Carolina; David John Adinolfi, II, Special Deputy Attorney
General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Delta Walsh seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendations and granting the
motions to dismiss certain Defendants with prejudice, denying
the motion to dismiss certain Defendants without prejudice, and
granting Walsh leave to file a second amended complaint
(excluding the Defendants dismissed with prejudice) or voluntary
dismissal within twenty days of the entry of the order.* We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Walsh v. Mackey, No. 1:11-cv-00321-MR-DCK (W.D.N.C. Aug.
3, 2012). 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
* Walsh’s appeal from this order was interlocutory when
filed. The district court’s subsequent entry of a final
judgment permits review of the order under the doctrine of
cumulative finality. In re Bryson, 406 F.3d 284, 287-89 (4th
Cir. 2005); Equip. Fin. Group, Inc. v. Traverse Computer
Brokers, 973 F.2d 345, 347 (4th Cir. 1992).

-- 3 of 3 --

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.