Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Anderson v. Lenoir County, 98-1412 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-1412 Visitors: 30
Filed: Jun. 24, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1412 ROBERT E. ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LENOIR COUNTY; KINSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; PRESTON C. ELLIS, JR., Individually and officer; C. SCOTT JACKSON, Individually and as officer; JOHN DOES, Individually; JOHN DOES; JANE DOES, Individually; JANE DOES; CARLTON NEIL FLOWERS, Individually; CARLTON NEIL FLOWERS, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1412 ROBERT E. ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LENOIR COUNTY; KINSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; PRESTON C. ELLIS, JR., Individually and officer; C. SCOTT JACKSON, Individually and as officer; JOHN DOES, Individually; JOHN DOES; JANE DOES, Individually; JANE DOES; CARLTON NEIL FLOWERS, Individually; CARLTON NEIL FLOWERS, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-97-140-4-H-2) Submitted: June 9, 1998 Decided: June 24, 1998 Before HAMILTON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert E. Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Harrison Sasser, III, G. Christopher Olson, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Rudolph Alexander Ashton, III, SUMRELL, SUGG, CARMICHAEL & ASHTON, P.A., New Bern, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 civil rights complaint asserting violations under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1986 (1994) and North Carolina’s constitu- tion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reason- ing of the district court. Anderson v. Lenoir County, No. CA-97- 140-4-H-2 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 18, 1998). 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
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