Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lane v. Baker, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Lloyd Steven Lane under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several defendants. The district court denied relief to Lane, and the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as it determined the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-04-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7738

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Lloyd Steven Lane under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several defendants. The district court denied relief to Lane, and the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as it determined the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Lane v. Baker, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Lloyd Steven Lane under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several defendants. The district court denied relief to Lane, and the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument as it determined the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 06-7738

    LLOYD STEVEN LANE,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JUANITA H. BAKER; JEWYL E. DUNN; REGINA
    BROOKS; CHARLES L. MANN, SR.; ELBERT T. BUCK,
    JR.,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior
    District Judge. (5:05-ct-00212-H)

    Submitted:

    March 28, 2007

    Decided:

    April 11, 2007

    Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lloyd Steven Lane, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, NORTH
    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Lloyd Steven Lane appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.


    Baker, No. 5:05-ct-00212-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 12, 2006).

    Lane v.

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like