Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Yarborough v. Hunt, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    Danny Lamont Yarborough filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several North Carolina officials which was denied by the district court. Yarborough appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided. As the opinion was unpublished, it does not serve as binding precedent. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-01-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-7007

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Danny Lamont Yarborough filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several North Carolina officials which was denied by the district court. Yarborough appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided. As the opinion was unpublished, it does not serve as binding precedent. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    0 views2 pages

    Yarborough v. Hunt, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Danny Lamont Yarborough filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several North Carolina officials which was denied by the district court. Yarborough appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided. As the opinion was unpublished, it does not serve as binding precedent. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-7007

    DANNY LAMONT YARBOROUGH,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JAMES B. HUNT, JR.; FRANKLIN FREEMAN; LYNN C.
    PHILLIPS; JOSEPH LOFTON,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District
    Judge. (CA-95-459-5)
    Submitted:

    January 11, 1996

    Decided:

    January 23, 1996

    Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Danny Lamont Yarborough, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed
    the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court. Yarborough v. Hunt, No. CA-95-459-5 (E.D.N.C. June 27,
    1995). 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

    You might also like