# Tiffany Green v. Judge John Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · October 27, 2014

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745756

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 27, 2014
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745756

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1563

TIFFANY R. GREEN,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

JUDGE JOHN W. BROWN; MARK R. HERRING, Attorney General of
Virginia; THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA;
JOHN R. BROADWAY, Commissioner of the Virginia Employment
Commission; ROBERT Q. HARRIS, Asst. Counsel; JUDGE BRADLEY
B. CAVEDO, the Chairman of the Judicial Inquiry and Review
Commission all in either both their individual and/or
capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:14-cv-00205-RBS-TEM)

Submitted: October 20, 2014 Decided: October 27, 2014

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tiffany R. Green, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Tiffany R. Green appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing her complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012) for failure to state a claim and

denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. Green v. Brown, No.

2:14-cv-00205-RBS-TEM (E.D. Va. May 8 & June 11, 2014). We

grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745756. Public record. Not legal advice.