FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10613178
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Khalah Sabbakhan v. Lynn Brice

No. 10613178 · Decided June 17, 2025
No. 10613178 · Fourth Circuit · 2025 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided
June 17, 2025
Citation
No. 10613178
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 25-1225 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/17/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-1225 KHALAH SABBAKHAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LYNN BRICE; JENNIFER NESBITT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:24-cv-00910-JAG) 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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Khalah Sabbakhan, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1225 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/17/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Khalah Sabbakhan appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action challenging the decisions of a lower state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman ∗ doctrine and dismissing her claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act for failure to state a plausible claim for relief. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Sabbakhan’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, she has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Sabbakhan v. Brice, 3:24-cv-00910-JAG (E.D. Va. Feb. 12, 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 ∗ D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. Tr. Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923). 2
Plain English Summary
USCA4 Appeal: 25-1225 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/17/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
USCA4 Appeal: 25-1225 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/17/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Khalah Sabbakhan v. Lynn Brice in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 17, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10613178 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →