Filed: Dec. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7280 JAMES C. WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL MOOSE BUTLER; DAN FORD; GLORIA WILLIAMS, Nurse; ARCHIE MCLOYDE; NURSE RUBY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-98-354) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7280 JAMES C. WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL MOOSE BUTLER; DAN FORD; GLORIA WILLIAMS, Nurse; ARCHIE MCLOYDE; NURSE RUBY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-98-354) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7280 JAMES C. WILLIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EARL MOOSE BUTLER; DAN FORD; GLORIA WILLIAMS, Nurse; ARCHIE MCLOYDE; NURSE RUBY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-98-354) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James C. Willis, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Edward Canders, CUMBER- LAND COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James C. Willis appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Willis v. Butler, No. CA-98-354 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 14, 1999). 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