Filed: Jun. 26, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6646 TONY TRUESDALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYD BENNETT; ERNEST SUTTON; C. E. BATTLE; MR. REPASS; THEODIS BECK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-461-BO) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 26, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6646 TONY TRUESDALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYD BENNETT; ERNEST SUTTON; C. E. BATTLE; MR. REPASS; THEODIS BECK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-461-BO) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 26, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6646 TONY TRUESDALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYD BENNETT; ERNEST SUTTON; C. E. BATTLE; MR. REPASS; THEODIS BECK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-461-BO) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 26, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Truesdale, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Tony Truesdale appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Truesdale v. Bennett, No. CA-02-461-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Feb. 12, 2003; entered Feb. 14, 2003). 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
