Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

96-6180 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6180 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jul. 30, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 92 F.3d 1184 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Charles H. WRENN; Kermedis Jacobs; James Elliott Price, Sr.; James Byrd Miller; Frederick W. Corbett, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Frederick THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. Franklin E. FREEMAN, Jr., Secretary, North Carolina Department o
More

92 F.3d 1184

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Charles H. WRENN; Kermedis Jacobs; James Elliott Price,
Sr.; James Byrd Miller; Frederick W. Corbett,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
and
Frederick THOMAS, Plaintiff,
v.
Franklin E. FREEMAN, Jr., Secretary, North Carolina
Department of Corrections; Michael Easley, State
of North Carolina Attorney General,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 96-6180.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 23, 1996.
Decided July 30, 1996.

Charles H. Wrenn, Kermedis Jacobs, James Elliott Price, Sr., James Byrd Miller, Frederick W. Corbett, Appellants Pro Se.

William Dennis Worley, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM

1

The Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wrenn v. Freeman, No. CA-94-786-5-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 20, 1995). We deny the Appellants' motion for appointment of counsel and 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