Moment v. O'Malley
Moment v. O'Malley
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-2090
MICHAEL MOMENT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARTIN O’MALLEY; DOUGLAS F. GANSLER; ISIAH LEGGEIL; ANN HARRINGTON; THOMAS L. CRAVEN; BRIAN G. KIM; JESSICA M. HALL; JOHN M. STAYER; MONTGOMERY COUNTY MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:09-cv-02209-AW)
Submitted: February 25, 2010 Decided: March 2, 2010
Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Moment, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Michael Moment appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. ∗ We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Moment v. O’Malley, No. 8:09-cv-02209-AW (D. Md. filed Sept. 16, 2009; entered Sept. 17, 2009). 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
∗ Dist. of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.