Filed: Sep. 14, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1850 JEFFREY THOMAS FARMER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus POLICE DEPARTMENT OF CARRBORO, NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (CA-4-378-5-FL) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1850 JEFFREY THOMAS FARMER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus POLICE DEPARTMENT OF CARRBORO, NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (CA-4-378-5-FL) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1850 JEFFREY THOMAS FARMER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus POLICE DEPARTMENT OF CARRBORO, NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (CA-4-378-5-FL) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Thomas Farmer, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jeffrey Thomas Farmer appeals the district court’s order and judgment dismissing as frivolous his civil rights complaint against the Police Department of Carrboro, North Carolina. The court properly noted that Farmer’s complaint was filed in the wrong district and he could not seek punitive damages against a municipality under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 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. DISMISSED - 2 -
