U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2025

Jessiah Hubbard v. Jeffrey Jackson

Jessiah Hubbard v. Jeffrey Jackson
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 29, 2025

Jessiah Hubbard v. Jeffrey Jackson

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6118 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/29/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6118

JESSIAH JAMES HUBBARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEFFREY NEALE JACKSON, North Carolina Department of Justice; JAYLA COLE, North Carolina Department of Justice; SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA; NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS; PAUL C.

RIDGEWAY, Superior Court Division; CLAIRE V. HILL, Superior Court Division; NORTH CAROLINA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Tort Claims Court, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:24-ct-03272-BO-RJ)

Submitted: July 24, 2025 Decided: July 29, 2025

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jessiah James Hubbard, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6118 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/29/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Jessiah James Hubbard appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), ∗ and the denial of nondispositive motions as moot. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s determination that absolute immunity, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and prosecutorial immunity barred Hubbard’s claims, or in the court’s denial of Johnson’s remaining motions as moot. Because we affirm on immunity grounds, we need not reach the court’s alternative reasoning. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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 in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

∗ The district court’s order is final and appealable because the court did not grant leave to amend. Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order).

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