U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1999

Lovern v. Wimbish

Lovern v. Wimbish
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 28, 1999

Lovern v. Wimbish

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-1000

MICHAEL LOVERN, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus

WILLIAM L. WIMBISH, Honorable Judge, General District Court, City of Richmond, Civil Di- vision; J. B. WILKINSON, Honorable Judge, Virginia Circuit Court, Manchester Civil Division, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-98-679)

Submitted: May 25, 1999 Decided: May 28, 1999

Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Lovern, Sr., Richmond, Virginia, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory E. Lucyk, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Michael Lovern, Sr., appeals the district court’s order deny- ing his request that a writ of mandamus be issued against two state court judges, and the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration. We affirm, on the reasoning of the district court, the holding that the federal court lacked jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. See Lovern v. Wimbish, No. CA-98-679 (E.D. Va. Nov. 27, 1998). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for reconsideration.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.