Trent v. Commonwealth of VA
Trent v. Commonwealth of VA
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2608
JOHN J. “SWARTZ” TRENT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-98-72-L)
Submitted: December 15, 1998 Decided: January 15, 1999
Before HAMILTON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John J. Trent, Appellant Pro Se. James Walter Hopper, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
John J. “Swartz” Trent appeals the district court’s orders
dismissing as frivolous his claim for money damages against the
State of Virginia and denying injunctive relief. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s order dismissing his claim for
money damages as frivolous and find no reversible error. Accord-
ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Trent
v. Virginia, No. CA-98-72-L (W.D. Va. Oct. 15, 1998). Because the
injunctive relief Trent sought is no longer available, we dismiss
as moot his appeal from the district court’s order denying the in-
junction. See Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United
for Separation of Church & State, Inc.,
454 U.S. 464, 472(1982)
(requirement for actual controversy is injury capable of being re-
dressed by favorable decision against defendant). We deny Trent’s
motion to assign another district court judge. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished