The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
22-1047•Gabriella Tillery, as Guardian to G.M., and C.M. v. Baltimore City
22-1047Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 20, 2022
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-1047
GABRIELLA TILLERY, as Guardian to G.M., and C.M.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BALTIMORE CITY; BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
BALTIMORE COUNTY; BALTIMORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
LOWER CHICESTER TOWNSHIP; LOWER CHICESTER TOWNSHIP
POLICE DEPARTMENT; OFFICER TIMOTHY MCBRIDE; JOHN DOES 1-30;
RICHARD ROES 1-30,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
DELAWARE COUNTY; DELAWARE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:21-cv-01067-GLR)
Submitted: June 23, 2022 Decided: July 20, 2022
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Gabriella Tillery, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Patrick Redmond, BALTIMORE CITY
LAW DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland; Andrea Danielle Smith, BALTIMORE
COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Gabriella Tillery seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting Defendants’
motions to dismiss and dismissing her civil complaint with prejudice. However, after the
issuance of that order, the district court entered a margin order granting Tillery’s request
to withdraw her complaint without prejudice. Because the margin order superseded and
nullified the order from which Tillery seeks to appeal, there is no order properly before us
for review. We therefore dismiss the appeal. 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 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.