Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McClain v. Carter, 04-7220 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-7220 Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7220 BART FITZGERALD MCCLAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAY CARTER, Lieutenant; BRUCE C. CARPENTER, Correctional Officer; CODY BLAKE STEWART, Correctional Officer; OFFICER EDWARDS; OFFICER FOX, Defendants - Appellee, and NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Avery-Mitchell Facility, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7220 BART FITZGERALD MCCLAIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAY CARTER, Lieutenant; BRUCE C. CARPENTER, Correctional Officer; CODY BLAKE STEWART, Correctional Officer; OFFICER EDWARDS; OFFICER FOX, Defendants - Appellee, and NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Avery-Mitchell Facility, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-20-1-MU) Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bart Fitzgerald McClain, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, Roy Asberry Cooper, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Bart Fitzgerald McClain appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel and his motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint, and dismissing McClain’s civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See McClain v. Carter, No. CA-01-20-1-MU (W.D.N.C. July 15, 2004). 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 - 3 -
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