Richard Polidi v. Cheshire Parker Schneider, No. 17-1122 (4th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1122 RICHARD POLIDI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHESHIRE PARKER SCHNEIDER & BRYAN, PLLC; ALAN SCHNEIDER; JOHN DOES 1-3, Defendants - Appellees. No. 17-1124 RICHARD POLIDI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CARMEN HOYME BANNON, in each of her official and individual capacities; DOUGLAS BELL, Defendants - Appellees, and THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, an Agency of the State of North Carolina; WAYNE TRUAX, in each of his official and individual capacities; KATHERINE JEAN, in each of her official and individual capacities; JOHN DOES 1-10; JOHN DOES 1-5, Defendants. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN; 1:16-cv01535-TSE-MSN) Submitted: September 26, 2017 Decided: September 28, 2017 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Polidi, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Richard Polidi appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 (2012) complaints under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and denying his Motion to Set Aside Order and for a New Hearing. * We have reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Polidi v. Cheshire Parker Schneider & Bryan, PLLC, No. 1:16-cv-01534-TSE-MSN (E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2016; Jan. 25, 2017); Polidi v. Bannon, No. 1:16-cv-01535-TSE-MSN (E.D. Va. Dec. 28, 2016; filed Dec. 29, 2016 & entered Dec. 30, 2016). 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 * The district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over Polidi’s state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) (2012). 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.