Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

William Howard Porter v. Frank Horton, Lt. Sergant Watson, and Gary Truitt Dixon Timothy Overby Darell Wright, 92-7261 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-7261 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 25, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 986 F.2d 1414 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. William Howard PORTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Frank HORTON, Lt.; Sergant Watson, Defendants-Appellees, and Gary Truitt Dixon; Timothy Overby; Darell Wright, Defendants. No. 92-7261. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
More

986 F.2d 1414

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
William Howard PORTER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Frank HORTON, Lt.; Sergant Watson, Defendants-Appellees,
and Gary Truitt Dixon; Timothy Overby; Darell Wright, Defendants.

No. 92-7261.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 1, 1993
Decided: February 25, 1993

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Franklin T. Dupree, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-91-341-D)

William Howard Porter, Appellant Pro Se.

Jacob Leonard Safron, Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

1

William Howard Porter appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Porter v. Horton, No. CA-91-341-D (E.D.N.C. Oct. 6, 1992). 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

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