Filed: Jul. 29, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2757 LARRY DEAN MCSWAIN; ELENORA MCSWAIN, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus DAVID HUFFMAN; KERRY HAYER; TRENT DAVIS; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Carl Horn, III, Chief Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-120-5-H) Submitted: July 6, 1999 Decided: July 29, 1999 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubl
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2757 LARRY DEAN MCSWAIN; ELENORA MCSWAIN, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus DAVID HUFFMAN; KERRY HAYER; TRENT DAVIS; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Carl Horn, III, Chief Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-120-5-H) Submitted: July 6, 1999 Decided: July 29, 1999 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubli..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2757 LARRY DEAN MCSWAIN; ELENORA MCSWAIN, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus DAVID HUFFMAN; KERRY HAYER; TRENT DAVIS; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Carl Horn, III, Chief Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-120-5-H) Submitted: July 6, 1999 Decided: July 29, 1999 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Dean McSwain, Elenora McSwain, Appellants Pro Se. Tyrus Vance Dahl, Jr., WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry Dean McSwain and Elenora McSwain appeal the magistrate judge’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellees on the McSwains’ 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) action. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See McSwain v. Huffman, No. CA-97-120-5-H (W.D.N.C. Oct. 27, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2