Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gantt-El v. Bennett, 06-7904 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-7904 Visitors: 9
Filed: Feb. 09, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7904 GEORGE W. GANTT-EL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYD BENNETT; RICK JACKSON; PAULA Y. SMITH; NURSE CARELOCKE; HARDESTY, Correctional Officer; SERGEANT MARSHALL; WALRUTH, Nurse; HILDRETH, Nurse; DAVIS, Correctional Officer; NICHOLS, DHO; ALLAN A. JACKSON, DHO; PARSON, Correctional Officer; WEBSTER, Correctional Officer; PITTMAN, Correctional Officer; FREELAND, Correctional Officer; WILSON, Correctional Officer; CORRECT
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7904 GEORGE W. GANTT-EL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOYD BENNETT; RICK JACKSON; PAULA Y. SMITH; NURSE CARELOCKE; HARDESTY, Correctional Officer; SERGEANT MARSHALL; WALRUTH, Nurse; HILDRETH, Nurse; DAVIS, Correctional Officer; NICHOLS, DHO; ALLAN A. JACKSON, DHO; PARSON, Correctional Officer; WEBSTER, Correctional Officer; PITTMAN, Correctional Officer; FREELAND, Correctional Officer; WILSON, Correctional Officer; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES; RATLIFF; NURSE BRYS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00392) Submitted: January 25, 2007 Decided: February 9, 2007 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George W. Gantt-El, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: George W. Gantt-El appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and supplemental complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2000) and denying relief on his subsequent motion to alter or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gantt-El v. Bennett, No. 3:06-cv-00392 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 10, 2006; filed Oct. 25 & entered Oct. 26, 2006). We further deny Gantt-El’s motion for injunction and to show cause. 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