Williams v. Melitis , 34 F. App'x 940 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-7791
    ANTHONY RUSSELL WILLIAMS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CAPTAIN MELITIS; LIEUTENANT FULLILOVE; C/O
    CORRECTIONAL  OFFICER  GOODMAN; S.   ADAMS,
    Doctor,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    COUNTY OF PRINCE WILLIAM,
    Defendant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.  Claude M. Hilton, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-00-159-AM)
    Submitted:   May 16, 2002                     Decided:   May 22, 2002
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Anthony Russell Williams, Appellant Pro Se.      David John Fudala,
    Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony Russell Williams appeals the order denying as untimely
    his motion to add additional parties.*         The incident that gave rise
    to Williams’ complaint occurred on January 18, 1998, and is subject
    to a two-year statute of limitations.          Williams’ motion, which was
    filed in June 2001, attempted to add parties after the expiration
    of the statute of limitations.         That motion does not relate back to
    the original complaint, and is thus barred by the statute of
    limitations. See Intown Properties Management, Inc. v. Wheaton Van
    Lines, Inc., 
    271 F.3d 164
    , 170 (4th Cir. 2001).
    We affirm the order of the district court.           We dispense with
    oral       argument   because   the   facts   and   legal   contentions   are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    *
    This appeal was interlocutory when filed. However, because
    the district court entered final judgment prior to our
    consideration of this appeal, we have jurisdiction under the
    doctrine of cumulative finality. Equipment Fin. Group, Inc. v.
    Traverse Computer Brokers, 
    973 F.2d 345
    , 347 (4th Cir. 1992).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-7791

Citation Numbers: 34 F. App'x 940

Judges: Niemeyer, Michael, Motz

Filed Date: 5/22/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024