Eric Clark v. County of Fairfax, Virginia, No. 13-2101 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2101 ERIC S. CLARK, Plaintiff Appellant, v. THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA; RICHARD W. NAGEL, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; R. L. DAVIS, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; JOHN SPATA, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; JOHN H. KIM, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; T. B. SMITH, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; S. N. BRIM, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; JONATHAN STERN, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; KENNETH PFEIFFER, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; RANDALL C. HARGUS, Individually and in capacity as employee of Fairfax County, Virginia; JOHN DOE #1; JOHN DOE #2; JOHN DOE #3; JOHN DOE #4; JOHN DOE #5; JOHN DOE #6; JOHN DOE #7; JOHN DOE #8; JOHN DOE #9; JOHN DOE #10; JOHN DOE #11; JOHN DOE #12; JOHN DOE #13; JOHN DOE #14; JOHN DOE #15; JOHN DOE #16; JOHN DOE #17; JOHN DOE #18; JOHN DOE #19; JOHN DOE #20; JOHN DOE #21; JOHN DOE #22; JOHN DOE #23; JOHN DOE #24; JOHN DOE #25; JOHN DOE #26; JOHN DOE #27; JOHN DOE #28; JOHN DOE #29; JOHN DOE #30, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00616-GBL-JFA) Submitted: January 8, 2014 Decided: February 7, 2014 Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric S. Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Jamie Marie Greenzweig, FAIRFAX COUNTY ATTORNEY S OFFICE, Fairfax, Virginia; John David Gilbody, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Eric S. Clark appeals the district court s order dismissing his complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Defendants Nagel and Davis are entitled to judicial immunity. See King v. Myers, 973 F.2d 354, 356 (4th Cir. 1992). The County is entitled to sovereign immunity in federal court, just as it is in state court. 1651, 1657-58 (2011); See Sossamon v. Texas, 131 S. Ct. Seabolt S.E.2d 715, 719 (Va. 2012). v. County of Albermarle, 724 Clark s First and Fourth Amendment claims are belied by the record. See, e.g., United States v. Branch, Cir. 537 F.3d 328, 335 (4th 2008); Blakenship v. Manchin, 471 F.3d 523, 528 (4th Cir. 2006); Brown v. Gilmore, 278 F.3d 362, 367 (4th Cir. 2002). likewise meritless. order. legal before Clark s remaining claims are Accordingly, we affirm the district court s We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.
