Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

DAVID GRAHAM GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KENNETH W. STOLLE, Sheriff/High Constable; JOHN DOE, Sergeant/Sheriffs Deputy; JOHN DOE, Corporal/Sheriffs Deputy; JOHN DOE, Deputy Sheriff; JANE DOE, Deputy Sheriff, Defendants - Appellees.

PER CURIAM

UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00540-GBL-IDD) Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Graham Goodman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

David Graham Goodman appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to comply with its prior order. We vacate the order and remand for further proceedings.

We review the district court's order for abuse of discretion. See Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (4th Cir. 1989). A district court abuses its discretion when it relies on erroneous factual or legal premises. United States v. Thompson-Riviere, 561 F.3d 345, 348 (4th Cir. 2009) (citation and quotations omitted). The district court dismissed Goodman's complaint because he "submitted an amended complaint but has not returned the Consent Form or exhaustion affidavit." On appeal, Goodman claims that he submitted the consent form and exhaustion affidavit in the same envelope as the amended complaint. Upon reviewing the record, we have determined that the consent form and exhaustion affidavit are located in the record at R. 11 and R. 10-2. We thus conclude that the district court relied on an erroneous factual premise in dismissing the complaint.

Accordingly, we vacate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings. We deny Goodman's motion for a temporary restraining order. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Goodman v. Stolle
(Jan 13, 2014)