U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2026

Marcus Monchery v. Dryden

Marcus Monchery v. Dryden
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 30, 2026
Marcus Monchery v. Dryden

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2350 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/30/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-2350

MARCUS MONCHERY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DRYDEN, P.A., Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Joel Christopher Hoppe, Magistrate Judge. (7:23-cv-00461-JCH)

Submitted: March 26, 2026 Decided: March 30, 2026

Before RICHARDSON and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marcus Dontea Monchery, Appellant Pro Se. Grace Morse-McNelis, Glen Allen, Virginia, Austin Logan Obenshain, FRITH, ANDERSON & PEAKE, PC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2350 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/30/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Marcus Dontea Monchery appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in Monchery’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. ∗ Monchery also moves for leave to file his informal reply brief out of time and requests that this Court appoint him counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant the motion for leave to file his informal reply brief out of time, deny the request for appointment of counsel, and affirm the district court’s order. Monchery v. Dryden, No. 7:23-cv-00461-JCH (W.D. Va., Oct. 7, 2025). 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.

AFFIRMED

∗ The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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