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)
09-1553•Nathaniel E. Dozier, Jr. v. Jerry J. Skalsky
09-1553Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 14, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1553
NATHANIEL E. DOZIER, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
DOZIER & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JERRY J. SKALSKY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:09-cv-00015-JRS)
Submitted: September 10, 2009 Decided: September 14, 2009
Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathaniel E. Dozier, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Charles Richard
Cranwell, CRANWELL MOORE & EMICK, PLC, Roanoke, Virginia, Mark
Quentin Emick, Jr., CRANWELL MOORE & EMICK, PLC, Vinton,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel E. Dozier, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order dismissing his civil action against Jerry Skalsky, a
member of the Board of Supervisors of Prince George County,
Virginia. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Dozier v. Skalsky, No. 3:09-cv-00015-JRS (E.D.
Va. Apr. 28, 2009). We deny Appellee’s motion to dismiss the
appeal or disregard Dozier’s informal reply brief. 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.