Filed: Sep. 17, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1125 REGINALD L. FRAZIER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MAUREEN DEMAREST MURRAY; HENRY C. BABB, JR., JAMES LEE BURNEY; DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMIS- SION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-168-4-BO) Submitted: August 31, 1998 Decided: September 17, 199
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1125 REGINALD L. FRAZIER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MAUREEN DEMAREST MURRAY; HENRY C. BABB, JR., JAMES LEE BURNEY; DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMIS- SION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-168-4-BO) Submitted: August 31, 1998 Decided: September 17, 1998..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1125 REGINALD L. FRAZIER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MAUREEN DEMAREST MURRAY; HENRY C. BABB, JR., JAMES LEE BURNEY; DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMIS- SION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-168-4-BO) Submitted: August 31, 1998 Decided: September 17, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald L. Frazier, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Smithwick Harrell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) 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. Frazier v. Murray, No. CA-96-168-4-BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 16, 1997). 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