Redditt v. Fairfax Cnty Public, (4th Cir. 2003)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1440 LOUISE REDDITT; DOMINIQUE HOLLIS, Louise
Redditt, legal guardian; DENEISHA HOLLIS,
Louise Redditt, legal guardian, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus
FAIRFAX COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS; MAGISTRATE
BEHELER, Fairfax County Chief; MAGISTRATE
BRUGGERMAN, Fairfax County; FAIRFAX COUNTY,
VIRGINIA; FAIRFAX COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
MICHAEL MCDANIEL, Fairfax County Detective; D. M. HUBBARD, Fairfax County Deputy Sheriff;
DARCONTE, Fairfax County Police MPO; R. K. BISTLINE, Fairfax County Police Officer; LINDA
PETERSON; WEST FALLS STATION APARTMENTS; JUDGE
GALLUHUE, Honorable; PAT BENNICK, Ms.; JANE
OUELETTE, Ms.; STEPHANIE WILSON, Ms.; JUANITA
HARRIS, Ms.; NORMA SUAREZ; EVELYN MILLER, Ms.;
GATES, HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.; FAIRFAX
COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE; ABSOLON, Fairfax
County Lieutenant; PATRICIA WADE, Ms.; J. THOMAS MANGER, Colonel, Chief of Police; DAVID
BOBZIEN, Fairfax County Attorney; COMMONWEALTH
OF VIRGINIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES;
MELDON S. HOLLIS, JR.; SHARON FOX, Assistant
Manager West Falls Station Apartments; ERIN
HELZER; JAN FAIRBANE; FAIRFAX COUNTY BOARD OF
EDUCATION; ALISON VAN IDDEKINGE; JANNA ELLEN,
Department of Family Services; DENISE STUDENY,
Ms.; MARIO BEZZINI, Esquire; KAMONYA OMATETE,
Department of Family Services; STEPHANIE
SCOTT, Esquire; DECKELBAUM OGENS & RAFERTY,
CHARTERED ATTORNEYS AT LAW; UHAUL; FAIRFAX
COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER; FACET; THACKER,
Honorable Judge; CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT;
ROBERT HORAN, JR., Commonwealth Prosecutor
Attorney; RICHARD PORTER, Magistrate; PUBLIC
STORAGE PICKUP AND DELIVERY; FOR CHILDREN'S
SAKE; JAMES WILCOX, JR., Assistant County
Attorney; S. D. DESONIA, Officer; A-Z PAWN,
Inc.; THE COMMONS OF MCLEAN; KATE GREELY,
Clerk, Fairfax County Government Center, Defendants - Appellees, and
FAIRFAX COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS; FAIRFAX COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Defendants, versus
METRO PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED, Movant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-1275-A)
Submitted: October 15, 2003 Decided: November 12, 2003
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louise Redditt, Dominique Hollis, Deneisha Hollis, Appellants Pro
Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General,
Richmond, Virginia; James Edward Wilcox, Jr., Fairfax, Virginia;
Alexander Francuzenko, OÂ’CONNELL, OÂ’CONNELL & SARSFIELD, Rockville,
Maryland; Sanford Alex Friedman, LAW OFFICES OF SANFORD FRIEDMAN,
L.L.C., Washington, D.C.; Paul Desmond Flynn, HUNTON & WILLIAMS,
McLean, Virginia; Christopher Paul Spera, DECKELBAUM, OGENS, &
RAFTERY, CHARTERED, Bethesda, Maryland; Thomas Michael Hogan, HOGAN
& HEALD, Alexandria, Virginia; Stephen S. Brown, LIPSHULTZ & HONE,
CHARTERED, Silver Spring, Maryland; Paul Herbert Harrington, Jr.,
Fairfax, Virginia; Wendy Alyn Alexander, WALSH, COLUCCI,
STACKHOUSE, EMRICH & LUBELEY, P.C., Manassas, Virginia; Roya Palmer
Ewing, LAW OFFICE OF ROYA PALMER EWING, Richmond, Virginia; John
David McGavin, TRICHILO, BANCROFT, MCGAVIN, HORVATH & JUDKINS,
Fairfax, Virginia; F. Andrew Carroll, III, LAND, CLARK, CARROLL,
MENDELSON & BLAIR, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM
Louise Redditt, on behalf of herself and her two minor daughters, appeals the district court§ 1983 (2000). Redditt also appeals several other non-dispositive orders of the district court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Redditt v. Fairfax County Pub. Sch. , No. CA-02-1275-A (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 4, 2003 & entered Mar. 5, 2003; filed Apr. 9, 2003 & entered Apr. , 2003; filed Apr. 16, 2003 & entered Apr. 17, 2003; filed Apr. , 2003 & entered Apr. 24, 2003; May 1, 2003). We deny ReddittÂ’s motions for preparation of transcripts at government expense, for documentation, for videotaping, for discussion of settlement and for a change of venue. 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
Sponsored links
