Case ID: f-appx_639/html/0178-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daryl Lewis Gilley COLINOT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ESPEJO FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, RLLP t/a East Beach Marine Marina; Blandine Espejo; Vinings Marine, Inc.; The City of Norfolk, Virginia; Commonwealth of Virginia, Dept. of Game & Inland Fisheries; Stephen J. Gregory, an individual; Brian Parker, an individual; United States Postal Service; Espejo Friend or Associate, Jane Doe; Cutty Sark Marina; Jane Doe, Co-Owner/Cook; Officer Crowder, in Capacity of Chief of Investigations, Norfolk Police Department; Captain A.M. Pomeranz, Norfolk Police Department; Cindy Hall, in Capacity of Asst. City Atty; G.C. Wall, in Capacity of Police Officer; W.G. Snyder, in Capacity of Police Officer; Officer Logan, Norfolk Police Department; Police Officers, John Does 1-7 Norfolk PD; U.S. Postal Worker John Doe; Dorita Adams, as head of boat titling dept.; John Evans, as boat titling agent; Cindy Morgan, as boat titling agent, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 15-2316.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 19, 2016.
    Decided: April 21, 2016.
    Daryl Lewis Gilley Colinot, Appellant Pro Se. Marissa Marriott Henderson, Ventker Warman Henderson, PLLC, Norfolk, Virginia; Heather Ann Mullen, City Attorney’S Office, Norfolk, Virginia; Jonathan Duncan Pitchford, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia; Douglas Fredericks, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Daryl Lewis Gilley Colinot appeals the district court’s orders striking his third amended complaint, dismissing his civil action, and denying leave to file his fourth amended complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Colinot v. E. Beach-Bay Marine Marina, No. 2:14-cv-00475-RAJ-DEM (E.D. Va. Sept. 22 & Sept. 28, 2015). 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.