THORNE v. FBOP (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Tashawn THORNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer WESLEY, Piedmont Correctional Officer; Officer Sherwin, Piedmont Regional Jail; Officer Booker, Piedmont Regional Jail Officer; Officer Manns; Officer Evans; Officer Newcum; Officer Stokes, Defendants-Appellees, Ms. Bowen, Mental Health; Ms. L. Smith, Medical Nurse; Mrs. Sergeant Tisdale, Grievance Coordinator; Mr. Tisdale, Lieutenant; Ms. Robenson, Sergeant; Officer Wolfer; Major Pew; Captain Walker; Officer Langston; Piedmont Regional Jail, Private Jail; Virginia, Commonwealth of Virginia; Raymond Ridley, Lieutenant; Lanay Walker, Captain; Terry Scott, Captain; Steve Agnew, Major; Robert Pugh, Major; Donald Hunter, Superintendent; Charles Sammuel, Jr., FBOP Director; Loretta Lynch, Attorney General; Dr. Marino, Doctor at Piedmont Regional Jail; Mary T. Jones, Nurse; Captain Silas Blanton, Defendants.

No. 17-7039

Decided: April 23, 2018

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Tashawn Qwantreal Thorne, Appellant Pro Se.

Tashawn Qwantreal Thorne appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failing to comply with the court's order to explain his alleged violation of a consent order to withdraw money from his inmate trust account.^* We conclude that Thorne's response, which the district court understandably docketed as a notice of appeal, actually is an explanation in compliance with the court's order. We therefore vacate the district court's dismissal order and remand the case for the district court to consider Thorne's explanation in the first instance and to conduct further proceedings as necessary. We deny Thorne's motions for default judgment, for discovery, for appointment of counsel, and to compel. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE. The district court's dismissal without prejudice on procedural grounds is final and appealable. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc'y, 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015).

PER CURIAM:

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law