Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

O'Neal v. Merkel, 95-7795 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7795 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 18, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7795 TERENCE KENNETH O'NEAL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus T. E. MERKEL; NURSE CASHWELL; NURSE ALLEN; NURSE DAVIS; MR. CONN, Defendants - Appellees, and FRANKLIN E. FREEMAN, JR.; GARY DIXON; DOCTOR LOWY; DOCTOR SHAW; DOCTOR CASTALLOE; HARRY ALLSBROOK; MR. CHERRY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-94-476-5-
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7795 TERENCE KENNETH O'NEAL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus T. E. MERKEL; NURSE CASHWELL; NURSE ALLEN; NURSE DAVIS; MR. CONN, Defendants - Appellees, and FRANKLIN E. FREEMAN, JR.; GARY DIXON; DOCTOR LOWY; DOCTOR SHAW; DOCTOR CASTALLOE; HARRY ALLSBROOK; MR. CHERRY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-94-476-5-CT-H) Submitted: October 31, 1996 Decided: November 18, 1996 Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terence Kenneth O'Neal, Appellant Pro Se. Mark John Pletzke, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Ac- cordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. O'Neal v. Merkel, No. CA-94-476-5-CT-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 26, 1995). We dis- pense 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
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