Phillip Leiser v. Donald Lemon, No. 18-1829 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1829 PHILLIP B. LEISER; CREATIVE LEGAL SOLUTIONS, PLLC, f/k/a The Leiser Law Firm, PLLC, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. CHIEF JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMON, In his Official Capacity as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia; THE HONORABLE J. MARTIN BASS, In his Official Capacity as Judge, Pro Tempore of the Circuit Court of Fauquier County, Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00349-LMB-MSN) Submitted: November 27, 2018 Decided: December 13, 2018 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Phillip B. Leiser, THE LEISER LAW FIRM, Tysons Corner, Virginia, for Appellants. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal the district court’s order dismissing their civil complaint for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. * See Leiser v. Lemon, No. 1:18-cv00349-LMB-MSN (E.D. Va. June 21, 2018); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3); Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006); Lance v. Dennis, 546 U.S. 459, 463-64 (2006); Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 899 F.3d 260, 283 (4th Cir. 2018); Thana v. Bd. of License Comm’rs for Charles Cty., 827 F.3d 314, 318-20 (4th Cir. 2016); Adkins v. Rumsfeld, 464 F.3d 456, 464-65 (4th Cir. 2006). 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 * We agree that the district court lacked jurisdiction based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, or alternatively, based on Appellants’ failure to demonstrate standing. 2

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.