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)
12-1971•Chase Carmen Hunter v. Paul W. Higgs, individually
12-1971Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 1, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1971
CHASE CARMEN HUNTER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PAUL W. HIGGS, individually and in his official capacity as
Sheriff of the City of Fredericksburg, Virginia; WILLIAM
REYES, III, individually and in his official capacity as a
Deputy for the City of Fredericksburg Sheriff and in his
official capacity as a paid worker for the City of
Fredericksburg; CITY OF FREDERICKSBURG, VA; NICHOLAS
TALBERT, individually and in his official capacity as an
employee for the City of Fredericksburg Sheriff and in his
official capacity as a paid worker for the City of
Fredericksburg,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:12-cv-00513-JAG)
Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 1, 2012
Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chase Carmen Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Grant Edward Kronenberg,
MORRIS & MORRIS, Richmond, Virginia; Medford Jennings Brown, IV,
Jennifer Lee Parrish, PARRISH, HOUCK & SNEAD, PLC,
Fredericksburg, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Chase Carmen Hunter appeals the district court’s order
granting Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss
her complaint and its order denying her motion for appointment
of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Hunter v. Higgs, No. 3:12-cv-00513-JAG (E.D.
Va. July 24, 2012; Aug. 6, 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.