Andrea Fuller v. Culpeper County, Virginia

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: December 19, 2023
• Docket: 23-1500
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1500 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1500

ANDREA JEAN FULLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CULPEPER COUNTY, VIRGINIA; CULPEPER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS; WILLIAM E. MARTIN, JR.; JENNIFER ROSENFELD; JOHN C. EGERTSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00058-NKM-JCH)

Submitted: November 20, 2023 Decided: December 19, 2023

Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andrea Jean Fuller, Appellant Pro Se. Jeremy David Capps, Sarah Marie Carroll, HARMAN CLAYTOR CORRIGAN & WELLMAN, Glen Allen, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1500 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Andrea Jean Fuller appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying her motion to

appoint counsel and the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss her

complaint alleging discrimination and retaliatory termination in violation of the Americans

with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as

amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 to 796l. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. * Accordingly, we affirm. Fuller v. Culpeper Cnty., No. 3:22-cv-00058-NKM-JCH

(W.D. Va. Oct. 24, 2022 & Apr. 13, 2023). 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

* Contrary to the magistrate judge’s statement, the district court has the authority to appoint counsel in civil actions to represent parties who, like Fuller, are proceeding in forma pauperis. See, e.g., Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 966 (4th Cir. 1987). However, as Fuller’s action was not so complex that counsel was necessary, we find no abuse of discretion in the denial of the motion to appoint counsel.