The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-1755•Gearlean B. Parker v. Dr. Lind W. Chinnery
05-1755Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 26, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1755
GEARLEAN B. PARKER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DR. LIND W. CHINNERY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson,
District Judge. (CA-05-3-4)
Submitted: October 20, 2005 Decided: October 26, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gearlean B. Parker, Appellant Pro Se. Darren Thomas Marting,
LECLAIR RYAN, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Gearlean B. Parker appeals the district court's order
dismissing her action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
because she failed to allege any basis for federal jurisdiction.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Parker v. Chinnery, No. CA-05-3-4 (E.D. Va. June 16, 2005). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.