Filed: Apr. 25, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1180 DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GLENN SPIVEY, Trenton Town Clerk and Custodian of Public Records; SHERI M. DAVENPORT, Former Town Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:05-mc-00009-H) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, a
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1180 DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GLENN SPIVEY, Trenton Town Clerk and Custodian of Public Records; SHERI M. DAVENPORT, Former Town Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:05-mc-00009-H) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, an..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1180 DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GLENN SPIVEY, Trenton Town Clerk and Custodian of Public Records; SHERI M. DAVENPORT, Former Town Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:05-mc-00009-H) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Johnson Willis, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Daniel Johnson Willis appeals the district court orders not granting him approval to file a complaint pursuant to the court’s order enjoining him from filing complaints without prior approval of the court and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and affirm for the reasons of the district court. See Willis v. Spivey, No. 4:05-mc-00009-H (E.D.N.C. Dec. 13, 2005; Feb. 3, 2006). 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 -