John Cutonilli v. Federal Transit Administration

Fourth Circuit

John Cutonilli v. Federal Transit Administration

623 F. App'x 616

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 3, 2015

Docket15-1725

StatusUnpublished

This text of 623 F. App'x 616 (John Cutonilli v. Federal Transit Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

John Cutonilli v. Federal Transit Administration, 623 F. App'x 616 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Cutonilli ' appeals the district court’s order granting the Federal Transit Administration’s and the Maryland Transit Administration’s summary judgment motions on Cutonilli’s claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as its order denying Cutonilli’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. It is undisputed that the Red Line Project, which was a proposed east-west mass transit line and the subject of Cutonilli’s claims, has been cancelled. We thus find that the appeal has been rendered moot. See Chafin v. Chafin, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1017, 1023, 185 L.Ed.2d 1 (2013) (holding that “[fjederal courts may not decide questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them or give opinions advising what the law would be upon a hypothetical state of facts”) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted); Knox v. Service Employees Int’l Union, Local 1000, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2277, 2287, 183 L.Ed.2d 281 (2012) (recognizing that “[a] case becomes moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s orders, remand the case to the district court, and instruct the district court to dismiss Cutonilli’s claims. See Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 364 (4th Cir.2003) (“If a claim becomes moot after the entry of a district court’s final judgment and prior to the completion of appellate review, we generally vacate the judgment and remand for dismissal.”). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately *617 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Cutonilli ' appeals the district court’s order granting the Federal Transit Administration’s and the Maryland Transit Administration’s summary judgment motions on Cutonilli’s claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as its order denying Cutonilli’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. It is undisputed that the Red Line Project, which was a proposed east-west mass transit line and the subject of Cutonilli’s claims, has been cancelled. We thus find that the appeal has been rendered moot. See Chafin v. Chafin, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1017, 1023, 185 L.Ed.2d 1 (2013) (holding that “[fjederal courts may not decide questions that cannot affect the rights of litigants in the case before them or give opinions advising what the law would be upon a hypothetical state of facts”) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted); Knox v. Service Employees Int’l Union, Local 1000, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2277, 2287, 183 L.Ed.2d 281 (2012) (recognizing that “[a] case becomes moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s orders, remand the case to the district court, and instruct the district court to dismiss Cutonilli’s claims. See Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 364 (4th Cir.2003) (“If a claim becomes moot after the entry of a district court’s final judgment and prior to the completion of appellate review, we generally vacate the judgment and remand for dismissal.”). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately *617 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

623 F. App'x 616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-cutonilli-v-federal-transit-administration-ca4-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack