SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. v. Andrew Aquila

Fourth Circuit

SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. v. Andrew Aquila

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 14, 2023

Docket23-1437

StatusUnpublished

This text of SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. v. Andrew Aquila (SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. v. Andrew Aquila) 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

SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. v. Andrew Aquila, (4th Cir. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1437 Doc: 41 Filed: 12/14/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1437

SREIT BROAD VISTA TERRACE, L.L.C.,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ANDREW A. AQUILA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:23-cv-00295-CMH-WEF)

Submitted: November 16, 2023 Decided: December 14, 2023

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andrew A. Aquila, Appellant Pro Se. Alfredo Acin, OFFIT KURMAN, PA, Tysons Corner, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1437 Doc: 41 Filed: 12/14/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Andrew A. Aquila appeals the district court’s order remanding to the state court the

unlawful detainer action that Aquila had removed to the federal district court. Before

Aquila filed the notice of removal, the state court entered judgment of possession in favor

of SREIT Broad Vista Terrace, L.L.C. After the district court remanded the case, the

unlawful detainer action proceeded to final judgment in the state court. Therefore, even if

we were to review the order and conclude that the remand was in error, relitigation of the

unlawful detainer claim would be barred by the doctrine of res judicata. See Sykes v. Texas

Air Corp., 834 F.2d 488, 490-91 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as

moot. See Fleet Feet, Inc. v. NIKE, Inc., 986 F.3d 458, 463 (4th Cir. 2021). We deny

Aquila’s motion to compel the transmission of the state court record to this court. 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

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