Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Draughon v. Social Services, 00-2380 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-2380 Visitors: 12
Filed: Feb. 20, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2380 IRMA JO DRAUGHON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-00-177-7-F) Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decided: February 20, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irma Jo Draughon, Appellan
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2380 IRMA JO DRAUGHON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SERVICES, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-00-177-7-F) Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decided: February 20, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irma Jo Draughon, Appellant Pro Se. Gordon Claiborne Woodruff, Smithfield, North Carolina; Benjamin R. Warrick, Clinton, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Irma Jo Draughon appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint against the Sampson County Department of Social Ser- vices as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Draughon’s complaint based on the reasoning of the district court. See Draughon v. Social Services, No. CA-00-177-7-F (E.D.N.C. Sept. 26, 2000). Sampson County Department of Social Services’ motion to dismiss and impose sanctions is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials 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