Court Opinion

ID: 9387137
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-14 21:01:13.063725+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:11.624189
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2156       Doc: 55        Filed: 04/13/2023     Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 21-2156

        ILONKA AYLWARD,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        CITY OF CHARLOTTE;                ARMSTRONG          GLEN,    P.C.;   JOSEPH      H.
        LETOURNEAU,

                             Defendants - Appellees,

                      and

        CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG STORM WATER SERVICES, a/k/a Charlotte
        Stormwater Services, a/k/a Charlotte/Mecklenburg Storm Water, a/k/a Charlotte
        Storm Water Services, a/k/a City of Charlotte Storm Water Services,

                             Defendant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:21-cv-00232-MOC-DSC)

        Submitted: March 23, 2023                                        Decided: April 13, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-2156      Doc: 55         Filed: 04/13/2023    Pg: 2 of 3

        Ilonka Aylward, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Edward Powers, III, Senior Assistant City
        Attorney, Clarence Edward Matherson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY,
        Charlotte, North Carolina; Sandra W. Mitterling, Amie Carol Sivon, RAGSDALE
        LIGGETT, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 21-2156      Doc: 55         Filed: 04/13/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Ilonka Aylward has filed an appeal from the district court’s order denying her

        Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Prohibitive Preliminary Injunction.

        Appellees have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction on the ground

        that they have finished the activities Aylward sought to enjoin and that the appeal is now

        moot. Aylward opposes the motion. Upon review of the materials relative to this appeal,

        we grant the Appellees’ motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal as moot. See Di Biase

        v. SPX Corp., 872 F.3d 224, 231 (4th Cir. 2017). 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.

                                                                                      DISMISSED

                                                    3