Robert Quinn v. Cumberland County

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-2170

ROBERT QUINN, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:23-cv-00046-BO-RN)

Submitted: May 30, 2024 Decided: June 3, 2024

Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Quinn, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Alford Hasty, Jr., Assistant County Attorney, CUMBERLAND COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Quinn appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint challenging the termination of his parental rights as barred by the Rooker- Feldman ∗ doctrine. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Hulsey v. Cisa, 947 F.3d 246, 249 (4th Cir. 2020) (stating standard of review of dismissal of claims as barred by Rooker-Feldman). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Quinn v. Cumberland Cnty., No. 5:23-cv-00046-BO-RN (E.D.N.C. Oct. 16, 2023). We also deny Quinn’s motion to assign counsel. 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

∗

Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923); D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983).