Filed: Jan. 27, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2456 DAVID P. FARLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOEL LEEB, D.D.S., M.S.D; MIKE YONK, Cedarhurst, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-712-5-BR) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismisse
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2456 DAVID P. FARLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOEL LEEB, D.D.S., M.S.D; MIKE YONK, Cedarhurst, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-712-5-BR) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2456 DAVID P. FARLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOEL LEEB, D.D.S., M.S.D; MIKE YONK, Cedarhurst, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-712-5-BR) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David P. Farley, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders dismissing his complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 1915A(e)(2) (West Supp. 1997), and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is friv- olous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Farley v. Leeb, No. CA-97-712-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 2 & 7, 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. DISMISSED 2
