Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Justice v. Pope, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views3 pages
    Theodore Justice appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various defendants. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim. The appellate court conducted a review of the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-02-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-2065

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Theodore Justice appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various defendants. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim. The appellate court conducted a review of the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views3 pages

    Justice v. Pope, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Theodore Justice appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various defendants. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim. The appellate court conducted a review of the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-2065

    THEODORE JUSTICE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ART POPE, in his individual and official
    capacity; JACK S. HOLMES, in his individual
    and official capacity; NANCY WELLS, in her
    individual and official capacity; CARON CROSS,
    in her individual and official capacity; DAWN
    STEADMAN, in her individual and official
    capacity; KRISTEN MCRAY, in her individual and
    official capacity; BUCK LATTIMORE, in his
    individual
    and
    official
    capacity;
    TRACY
    WEAVER, in her individual and official
    capacity, and others sued in their individual
    and official capacities,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
    District Judge. (5:07-cv-00251-FL)

    Submitted:

    January 24, 2008

    Decided:

    February 12, 2008

    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Theodore Justice, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Theodore

    Justice

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing


    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1915(e)(2)(B).

    1983
    We

    (2000)

    have

    complaint

    reviewed

    the

    under

    record

    28
    and

    U.S.C.
    find

    no

    reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by


    the

    district

    court.

    Justice

    (E.D.N.C. July 2, 2007).

    v.

    Pope,

    No.

    5:07-cv-00251-FL

    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

    - 3 -

    You might also like