Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Patterson v. Durham Area Transit, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed a district court's order denying Loria Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against various defendants. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. However, the appeals court modified the district court's dismissal to be without prejudice, rather than with prejudice. While granting Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis, the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling, as modified to be a dismissal without prejudice.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-06-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-1416

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed a district court's order denying Loria Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against various defendants. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. However, the appeals court modified the district court's dismissal to be without prejudice, rather than with prejudice. While granting Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis, the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling, as modified to be a dismissal without prejudice.

    Copyright:

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

    Patterson v. Durham Area Transit, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed a district court's order denying Loria Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against various defendants. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. However, the appeals court modified the district court's dismissal to be without prejudice, rather than with prejudice. While granting Patterson's request to proceed in forma pauperis, the appeals court affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in the lower court's ruling, as modified to be a dismissal without prejudice.

    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. 97-1416

    LORIA A. PATTERSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DURHAM AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY; NORTH CAROLINA
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; GARLAND GARRETT;
    LARRY GOODE; CITY OF DURHAM, North Carolina;
    ORVILLE POWELL; JACKIE MCNEIL, City of Durham,
    North Carolina Police Department; JAMES B.
    HUNT, State of North Carolina; TRANSIT MANAGEMENT OF DURHAM,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District
    Judge. (CA-96-1060-5-BO-3)
    Submitted:

    May 29, 1997

    Decided:

    June 6, 1997

    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Loria A. Patterson, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying leave to
    proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her 42 U.S.C. 1983
    (1994) action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's
    opinion and find no reversible error. The district courts order is
    modified to reflect that the dismissal is without prejudice. See 28
    U.S.C. 2106 (1994). Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court, as modified. Patterson v. Durham Area Transit Auth., No. CA96-1060-5-BO-3 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 25, 1997). 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 AS MODIFIED

    You might also like