Case ID: f-appx_58/html/0998-01.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

Gail W. GODWIN; Skye Godwin, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. STATE OF VIRGINIA CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION; Stephen Cannella, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-2112.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 24, 2003.
    Decided March 13, 2003.
    Gail W. Godwin, Skye Godwin, Appellants Pro Se. Peter Robert Messitt, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia; William DeLaney Bayliss, James Scott Kulp, Williams, Mullen, Clark & Dobbins, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Gail Godwin and Skye Godwin appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. See Godwin v. Virginia Child Support Enforcement Division, No. CA-0-421 (E.D.Va. Aug. 30, 2002). 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. 
      
       To the extent that Gail Godwin has standing based on her claims of humiliation, embarrassment, and mental and emotional stress, her claims fail for the same reasons as Skye's, as set forth in the district court's opinion. Further, as to Plaintiffs' claim on appeal that Defendant Canella should be considered a state actor because he conspired with state actors, their claim is unsupported and thus must fail. See Phillips v. Mashburn, 746 F.2d 782, 785 (11th Cir. 1984).