Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Moses v. Evans, 04-7685 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-7685 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 10, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7685 EDWARD L. MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONNIE EVANS, Correctional Officer; RICK JACKSON, Superintendent; DAVID W. HINSON, Correctional Captain; EDWARD LITTLE, Correctional Lieutenant; ROBERT MEECE, Correctional Lieutenant; RICHARD PORTEN, Correctional Sergeant; FREDDIE WEST, Correctional Sergeant; ALVIN LITTLE, Correctional Sergeant; JOHN WATKINS, Correctional Programs Director; STEPHANIE GILES, Correctional Pr
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7685 EDWARD L. MOSES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONNIE EVANS, Correctional Officer; RICK JACKSON, Superintendent; DAVID W. HINSON, Correctional Captain; EDWARD LITTLE, Correctional Lieutenant; ROBERT MEECE, Correctional Lieutenant; RICHARD PORTEN, Correctional Sergeant; FREDDIE WEST, Correctional Sergeant; ALVIN LITTLE, Correctional Sergeant; JOHN WATKINS, Correctional Programs Director; STEPHANIE GILES, Correctional Programs Administrative Assistant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-433-3) Submitted: January 10, 2005 Decided: February 10, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward L. Moses, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Edward L. Moses appeals a district court judgment granting summary judgment to the Appellees and dismissing his civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Moses v. Evans, No. CA-02-433-3 (W.D.N.C. filed Oct. 1, 2004 & entered Oct. 4, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions of the parties 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