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)
25-2386•D. Miranda Burroughs v. Hampton Roads Transit
25-2386Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 23, 2026
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-2386
D. MIRANDA BURROUGHS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
HAMPTON ROADS TRANSIT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, Senior District Judge. (4:25-cv-00009-RAJ-LRL)
Submitted: June 18, 2026 Decided: June 23, 2026
Before GREGORY and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darlene Miranda Burroughs, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
D. Miranda Burroughs appeals the district court’s order granting her application to
proceed in forma pauperis, but dismissing Burroughs’ action for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. A review of Burroughs’ complaint confirms that she raised no federal
question, and that both she and Defendant are Virginia citizens. We thus conclude that the
district court correctly dismissed Burroughs’ action. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1332 (setting
forth requirements for federal question and diversity jurisdiction of federal district courts,
which includes “civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United
States,” and “actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, and is between . . . citizens of different States”).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court order. Burroughs v. Hampton Roads
Transit, No. 4:25-cv-00009-RAJ-LRL (E.D. Va. Oct. 16, 2025). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.