Filed: Jul. 14, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1593 VICTOR HIGH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN KENNEDY, Clerk of Superior Court, Wake County, North Carolina, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-685-5-BR) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cur
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1593 VICTOR HIGH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN KENNEDY, Clerk of Superior Court, Wake County, North Carolina, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-685-5-BR) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1593 VICTOR HIGH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN KENNEDY, Clerk of Superior Court, Wake County, North Carolina, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-685-5-BR) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor High, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Jerome Murray, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Victor High appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action. 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. See High v. Kennedy, No. CA- 98-685-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Mar. 3, 1999). We dispense with oral argu- ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
