MorningStar Fellowship Church v. York County, South Carolina ( 2022 )

USCA4 Appeal: 20-1896 Doc: 20 Filed: 08/30/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1896
MORNINGSTAR FELLOWSHIP CHURCH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
YORK COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA; JAMES E. BAKER; HOUSTON MOTZ,
“Buddy”; MICHAEL JOHNSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
Hill. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (0:18-cv-03077-JMC)
Submitted: August 19, 2022 Decided: August 30, 2022
Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Donald M. Brown, Jr., BROWN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, Charlotte, North
Carolina, for Appellant. W. Keith Martens, HAMILTON MARTENS, LLC, Rock Hill,
South Carolina; Michael Kendree, York County Attorney, York, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 20-1896 Doc: 20 Filed: 08/30/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
MorningStar Fellowship Church (“MorningStar”) appeals the district court’s order
granting York County’s motion to dismiss as time-barred MorningStar’s claim pursuant to
the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA”), 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000cc-2000cc-5. ∗ We affirm.
We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
Rockville Cars, LLC v. City of Rockville, 891 F.3d 141, 145 (4th Cir. 2018). In doing so,
we “accept the factual allegations of the complaint as true and construe them in the light
most favorable to the nonmoving party.” Id.We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not reversibly
err in its determination that Morningstar’s RLUIPA claim was barred under the applicable
four-year statute of limitations. See 28 U.S.C. § 1658; Nat’l Advert. Co. v. City of Raleigh,
947 F.2d 1158, 1166-67 (4th Cir. 1991) (discussing continuing violations doctrine).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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
∗
MorningStar has forfeited appellate review of all other claims adjudicated by the
district court in this case by not raising those issues in its opening brief. See Grayson O
Co. v. Agadir Int’l, LLC, 856 F.3d 307, 316 (4th Cir. 2017).
2