Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Bartlett v. Harviel, 02-6467 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6467 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 05, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6467 ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR., a/k/a Director, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST HARVIEL, Judge; JOHN DOE, I-X; JANE SMITH; ALEXA JORDAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-241-1) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 5, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTO
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6467 ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR., a/k/a Director, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST HARVIEL, Judge; JOHN DOE, I-X; JANE SMITH; ALEXA JORDAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-241-1) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 5, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Staci Tolliver Meyer, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; David Iverson Smith, ALAMANCE COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Graham, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Bartlett v. Harviel, No. CA-00-241-1 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2002). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer