Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

90-6929 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6929 Visitors: 12
Filed: Oct. 03, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 946 F.2d 884 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Robert Eugene BAILES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. K.M. HAWK, Warden, Buddy Levins, Assistant Warden, Dave Farmer, Administrative Assistant, Terry Clark, Unit Manager, Wake Forest Unit, Jerry Gaughan, Caseworker, Donna Wagoner, Counsel
More

946 F.2d 884

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Robert Eugene BAILES, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
K.M. HAWK, Warden, Buddy Levins, Assistant Warden, Dave
Farmer, Administrative Assistant, Terry Clark, Unit Manager,
Wake Forest Unit, Jerry Gaughan, Caseworker, Donna Wagoner,
Counsel, Jim Brand, Unit Manager, Billy W. Boggs,
Caseworker, Ronnie S. Lunsford, Counselor, Thomas S.
Mortimer, Correction Officer, James D. King, ISM Officer,
Ann Turner, ISM Supervisor, Fran Bateman, ISM Officer, Steve
Counts, Correctional Supervisor, William E. Compston,
Correctional Supervisor, B. Barnes, ISM Officer, Mail Room,
Unknown Mail Room Workers, ISM Officers, John Shore, Duty
Officer, Bill Hartman, Duty Officer, Kathy Humphrey,
Supervisor, Education, E.L. Smith, Night Supervisor,
Education, Eight Unknown Medical Staff, Bureau of Prisons,
Attorney General of the United States, Margaret P. Currin,
United States Attorney, B. Booker, Director of Prisons,
Defendants-Appellees.
Bob E. Bailes, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
K.M. Hawk, Warden, Buddy Levins, Assistant Warden, Dave
FARMER, Administrative Assistant, Terry Clark, Unit Manager,
Wake Forest Unit, Jerry Gaughan, Caseworker, Donna Wagoner,
Counsel, Jim Brand, Unit Manager, Billy W. Boggs,
Caseworker, Ronnie S. Lunsford, Counselor, Thomas S.
Mortimer, Correction Officer, James D. King, ISM Officer,
Ann Turner, ISM Supervisor, Fran Bateman, ISM Officer, Steve
Counts, Correctional Supervisor, William E. Compston,
Correctional Supervisor, B. Barnes, ISM Officer, Mail Room,
Unknown Mail Room Workers, ISM Officers, John Shore, Duty
Officer, Bill Hartman, Duty Officer, Kathy Humphrey,
Supervisor, Education, E.L. Smith, Night Supervisor,
Education, Eight Unknown Medical Staff, Bureau of Prisons,
Attorney General of the United States, Margaret P. Currin,
United States Attorney, B. Booker, Director of Prisons,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6929.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 31, 1991.
Decided Oct. 3, 1991.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CA-88-818-CRT)

Robert Eugene Bailes, appellant pro se.

Eileen G. Coffey, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, N.C., for appellees.

E.D.N.C.

DISMISSED IN NO. 90-6929, AFFIRMED IN NO. 91-7565

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Robert E. Bailes appeals in No. 91-7565 from the district court's final order dismissing Bailes's Bivens* action, and in No. 90-6929 from a prior order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate and dismissing his claims for damages but staying his claim for injunctive relief pending a decision of this Court in United States v. Stotts, 925 F.2d 83 (4th Cir.1991). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that these appeals are without merit.

2

Accordingly, in No. 90-6929 we dismiss the appeal from the dismissal of damage claims as interlocutory and we dismiss the appeal of the stay pending our decision in Stotts as moot. In No. 91-7565, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Bailes v. Hawk, CA88-818-CRT (E.D.N.C. Apr. 1, 1991). 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.

3

No. 90-6929 DISMISSED, No. 91-7565 AFFIRMED.

*

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 40 U.S. 388 (1971)

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