Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
GREGORY SHAWN MERCER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. FAIRFAX COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, (FCCPS); FAIRFAX COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CODE COMPLIANCE, (FCDCC); ELIZABETH PERRY, FCDCC Supervisor On 3/5/14; JACK BLAIR, FCDCC Employee On 3/5/14; LATYCIA TANKS, FCDCC Employee On 3/5/14; KERRY S. ALLANDER, Virginia State Police Supervisor On 6/9/06; KENNETH S. HOUTZ, Virginia State Trooper On 6/9/06; KATHLEEN H. MACKAY, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge On 6/22/07; ELIZABETH A. MCCLANANHAN, Court Of Appels Of VA Judge On 2/18/09; LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; DONALD W. LEMON, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; LEROY F. MILLETTE, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; S. BERNARD GOODWYN, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; ALECIA WASKLEWICZ, FCCPS Supervisor On 3/6/14; FAIRFAX COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, (FCBoS); SHARON BULOVA, Chairman Of Fairfax County Board Of Supervisors, Defendants – Appellees, ALICIA WASKLEWICS, FCCPS Supervisor On 3/6/14; TANYA E. POWERS, FCCPS Social Worker On 3/6/14; WALTER S. FELTON, JR., Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Judge On 2/18/09; LARRY G. ELDER, Court Of Appeals Of Virginia Judge On 2/18/09; LEROY R. HASSELL, SR., Deceased Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge, 2/9/11; BARBARA M. KEENAN, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09; CYNTHIA D. KINSER, Supreme Court Of Virginia Judge On 9/22/09, Defendants.
Gregory Shawn Mercer appeals the district court's orders dismissing this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mercer v. Fairfax Cnty. Child Protective Servs., No. 1:15-cv-00302-LO-TCB (E.D. Va. Aug. 25 & Dec. 17, 2015; Feb. 11, 2016). The motions to compel, for a subpoena, to clarify, and to direct a state judge to verify a record's existence are denied. We grant the motions to exceed the length limitations for the brief and to file amended and supplemental informal reply briefs and amendments. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 16-1138
Decided: January 24, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)