Christina Moore v. Harrisonburg Police Department

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1216
CHRISTINA MOORE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
HARRISONBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; EX-CHIEF KELLY WARNER;
LIEUTENANT TODD MILLER; DETECTIVE BRADLEY MATTHIAS;
SERGEANT MEGAN LAPREVOTTE; DETECTIVE JONATHAN SNODDY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Harrisonburg. Jasmine Hyejung Yoon, District Judge. (5:24-cv-00109-JHY-JCH)
Submitted: June 12, 2025 Decided: June 17, 2025
Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christina Moore, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Christina Moore appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice her
pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a
claim.1 We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s
determination that the relevant statutes of limitations barred Moore’s claims.2
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Moore v. Harrisonburg Police Dep’t,
No. 5:24-cv-00109-JHY-JCH (W.D. Va. Feb. 6, 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
1 The district court’s order is final and appealable because the court did not grant
leave to amend the complaint. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022) (en
banc) (order).
2 Contrary to Moore’s assertion on appeal, she is not entitled to equitable tolling of
the limitations period. See Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 572 U.S. 1, 10 (2014) (explaining
that equitable tolling applies “when a litigant has pursued [her] rights diligently but some
extraordinary circumstance prevents [her] from bringing a timely action”).

-- 2 of 2 --