Engra Bellamy v. Alyssa Wells, No. 09-1702 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1702 ENGRA M. BELLAMY, Plaintiff Appellee, v. ALYSSA CAMPBELL WELLS; BRENT UZDANOVICS, Defendants Appellants, and DOUG DAVIS, Waynesboro Police Department; WAYNESBORO POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (5:07-cv-00035-sgw) Submitted: March 29, 2010 Decided: July 12, 2011 Before WILKINSON, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard H. Milnor, ZUNKA, MILNOR, CARTER & INIGO, LTD., Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellants. Dean E. Lhospital, SNEATHERN & LHOSPITAL, LLP, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Defendants their motion for challenge summary the district judgment in court s denial Plaintiff s 42 of U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action, in which they asserted the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. Mitchell v. appealable, Such orders 472 Forsyth, U.S. are 511, immediately 530 (1985), provided the denial rests on a purely legal determination that the facts, as viewed by the district court at the summary judgment stage, establish a violation of a clearly established right, Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 319-20 (1995). example, the insufficiency appealing of the official evidence to seeks raise a to If, for argue genuine issue the of material fact, this Court does not possess jurisdiction under [28 U.S.C.] § 1291 [(2006)] to consider the claim. Valladares v. Cordero, 552 F.3d 384, 388 (4th Cir. 2009). We conclude that the district court did not err when it denied Defendants qualified immunity. district court s order denying We thus affirm the Defendants summary judgment motion, as well as its order finding no basis to alter its previous ruling upon sua sponte reconsideration. * * Bellamy v. Although Defendants ask this court to determine what remedies are available to Plaintiff based on the conduct about which he complains, this issue is not inextricably intertwined with the qualified immunity question that is properly before us on interlocutory appeal. See Swint v. Chambers Cnty. Comm n, (Continued) 3 Wells, No. 5:07-cv-00035-sgw (W.D. Va. May 15, 2009; June 10, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before us and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 514 U.S. 35, 51 (1995); Rux v. Republic of Sudan, 461 F.3d 461, 475 (4th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we express no opinion on this issue. 4
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.
