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)
12-2578•Michael A. Scott v. City of Virginia Beach
12-2578Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 2, 2013
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2578
MICHAEL A. SCOTT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; KENNETH W. STOLLE; PAUL J.
LANTEIGNE; F. V. WILLIAMS; SYLVESTER WILLIAMS; JOHN NEWTON;
CASSANDRA LEE; STEVE WILKE; J. MANIGO; JOHN DOE; MARC F.
SCHUSTER; VICTORIA THOMSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:10-cv-00625-RAJ-DEM)
Submitted: April 19, 2013 Decided: May 2, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael A Scott, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Beverly, CITY
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Virginia Beach, Virginia; David Brandt
Oakley, POOLE MAHONEY PC, Chesapeake, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael A. Scott appeals the district court orders
and judgment granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss,
denying his motion to amend the complaint and denying
reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s orders and affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. Scott v. City of Virginia Beach, No. 2:10-cv-00625-RAJ-
DEM (E.D. Va., Sept. 29, 2011; April 4, 2012; Nov. 27, 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.