Filed: Nov. 07, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6980 HOMER AVERY WOOD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DONALD V. MICKLOS; LINDA PADGETT, RN; R. MEADOW; CYNTHIA A. HESTER, Defendants - Appellees, and BETH CHADWICK; DR. JOHN B. SMITH, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:10-ct-03039-D) Submitted: November 2, 2012 Decided: November 7, 2012 Before WILKINSON
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6980 HOMER AVERY WOOD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DONALD V. MICKLOS; LINDA PADGETT, RN; R. MEADOW; CYNTHIA A. HESTER, Defendants - Appellees, and BETH CHADWICK; DR. JOHN B. SMITH, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:10-ct-03039-D) Submitted: November 2, 2012 Decided: November 7, 2012 Before WILKINSON,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6980 HOMER AVERY WOOD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DONALD V. MICKLOS; LINDA PADGETT, RN; R. MEADOW; CYNTHIA A. HESTER, Defendants - Appellees, and BETH CHADWICK; DR. JOHN B. SMITH, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:10-ct-03039-D) Submitted: November 2, 2012 Decided: November 7, 2012 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Homer Avery Wood, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, Kelly Elizabeth Street, YOUNG, MOORE & HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina; Yvonne Bulluck Ricci, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Homer Avery Wood appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wood v. Micklos, No. 5:10-ct-03039-D (E.D.N.C. Apr. 27, 2012). 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