Ilonka Aylward v. City of Charlotte, No. 21-2156 (4th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2156 ILONKA AYLWARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF CHARLOTTE; LETOURNEAU, ARMSTRONG GLEN, P.C.; JOSEPH H. Defendants - Appellees, and CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG STORM WATER SERVICES, a/k/a Charlotte Stormwater Services, a/k/a Charlotte/Mecklenburg Storm Water, a/k/a Charlotte Storm Water Services, a/k/a City of Charlotte Storm Water Services, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:21-cv-00232-MOC-DSC) Submitted: March 23, 2023 Decided: April 13, 2023 Before WILKINSON, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ilonka Aylward, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Edward Powers, III, Senior Assistant City Attorney, Clarence Edward Matherson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Sandra W. Mitterling, Amie Carol Sivon, RAGSDALE LIGGETT, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Ilonka Aylward has filed an appeal from the district court’s order denying her Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Prohibitive Preliminary Injunction. Appellees have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that they have finished the activities Aylward sought to enjoin and that the appeal is now moot. Aylward opposes the motion. Upon review of the materials relative to this appeal, we grant the Appellees’ motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal as moot. See Di Biase v. SPX Corp., 872 F.3d 224, 231 (4th Cir. 2017). 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. DISMISSED 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.