Filed: Apr. 17, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2425 LEON LEBLOND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF JACKSONVILLE; JACKSONVILLE POLICE DE- PARTMENT; E. R. CAMPBELL, Defendants - Appellees. 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-99-175-7-F) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unp
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2425 LEON LEBLOND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF JACKSONVILLE; JACKSONVILLE POLICE DE- PARTMENT; E. R. CAMPBELL, Defendants - Appellees. 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-99-175-7-F) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2425 LEON LEBLOND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF JACKSONVILLE; JACKSONVILLE POLICE DE- PARTMENT; E. R. CAMPBELL, Defendants - Appellees. 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-99-175-7-F) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leon Leblond, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Edwin Edes, CROSSLEY, MCINTOSH, PRIOR & COLLIER, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Leon Leblond appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. 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 Leblond v. City of Jacksonville, No. CA-99- 175-7-F (E.D.N.C. Oct. 3, 2000). 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
