Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Astrop v. Brunswick Co Transp, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Henry Lewis Astrop's civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court found that Astrop did not allege facts to establish diversity jurisdiction. There was also no basis in law or fact for any claim against the United States. While Astrop's complaint could have been construed as an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Astrop admitted in his complaint that he was not injured in the automobile accident at issue. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-10-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-1698

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Henry Lewis Astrop's civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court found that Astrop did not allege facts to establish diversity jurisdiction. There was also no basis in law or fact for any claim against the United States. While Astrop's complaint could have been construed as an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Astrop admitted in his complaint that he was not injured in the automobile accident at issue. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views2 pages

    Astrop v. Brunswick Co Transp, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Henry Lewis Astrop's civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court found that Astrop did not allege facts to establish diversity jurisdiction. There was also no basis in law or fact for any claim against the United States. While Astrop's complaint could have been construed as an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Astrop admitted in his complaint that he was not injured in the automobile accident at issue. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-1698

    HENRY LEWIS ASTROP,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    BRUNSWICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION FOR BRUNSWICK
    COUNTY SCHOOLS; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Henry E. Hudson, District
    Judge. (CA-05-392-3)

    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.

    Henry Lewis Astrop, Appellant Pro Se. Abbigale Bricker Fredrick,


    THE CONRAD FIRM, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Henry Lewis Astrop appeals the district court's order
    dismissing

    his

    jurisdiction.

    civil

    action

    for

    lack

    of

    subject

    matter

    As the district court noted, Astrop has not alleged

    facts sufficient to establish jurisdiction based on diversity of


    citizenship.

    See 28 U.S.C. 1332 (2000).

    Further, there is no

    basis in law or fact for any claim against the United States.

    To

    the extent Astrops complaint could have been construed as an


    action

    under

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2000),

    Astrop

    admits

    in

    his

    complaint that he was not injured in the automobile accident at


    issue.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, although we deny Brunswick County Transportations


    motion to dismiss, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the
    district court. See Astrop v. Brunswick County Transp., No. CA-05392-3 (E.D. Va. June 20, 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 -

    You might also like