Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Dawkins v. Triplett, 02-7919 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-7919 Visitors: 26
Filed: May 28, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7919 JAMES EDWARD DAWKINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARK TRIPLETT, Officer of Catawba County; TONY A. KELLER, Lieutenant of Catawba County, Defendants - Appellees, and CATAWBA COUNTY; L. DAVID HUFFMAN, Sheriff of Catawba County, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-171) Submitted: May 14, 2003
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7919 JAMES EDWARD DAWKINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARK TRIPLETT, Officer of Catawba County; TONY A. KELLER, Lieutenant of Catawba County, Defendants - Appellees, and CATAWBA COUNTY; L. DAVID HUFFMAN, Sheriff of Catawba County, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-171) Submitted: May 14, 2003 Decided: May 28, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Dawkins, Appellant Pro Se. Alison Raney Bost, Andrew Christian Buckner, Robert Danny Mason, Jr., WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, P.L.L.C., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James Edward Dawkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reimbursement of costs. We have independently reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Dawkins v. Triplett, No. CA-97-171 (W.D.N.C. filed Oct. 31, 2002; entered Nov. 1, 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