Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
26-6253•Toccara Yvonne Puller v. Maggie Marshall
26-6253Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit02.06.2026
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 26-6253
TOCCARA YVONNE PULLER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MAGGIE MARSHALL; DENISE ZELAYA; WILLIAM TURNER; JASON
MCCANDLES; AL HARVIN DISTRICT; ALLISON CANNON, LCSW; C.
LOWELL; KAREN HAINER, Esq.; GARCIA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:25-cv-00706-JAG-MRC)
Submitted: May 28, 2026 Decided: June 2, 2026
Before WYNN, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Toccara Yvonne Puller, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Toccara Yvonne Puller appeals the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice her pro se civil action.* The district court dismissed Puller’s civil action because
she failed to comply with the magistrate judge’s order to complete and file a non-prisoner
in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the full filing fee. We have reviewed the record and
discern no reversible error. See Attkisson v. Holder, 925 F.3d 606, 620 (4th Cir. 2019)
(stating standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Puller v.
Marshall, No. 3:25-cv-00706-JAG-MRC (E.D. Va. Jan. 22, 2026). 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’s dismissal order is a final decision because the court dismissed
the action “without providing leave to amend.” Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir.
2022) (en banc).
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.