Filed: Sep. 26, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1594 CHRISTOPHER J. ODINKEMELU, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JORJA WILLIAMS; MYRTLE FOUST; VERONICA MCLEAN; KAREN JONES; ALICIA OAKLEY RESENDIZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-750-1) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judge
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1594 CHRISTOPHER J. ODINKEMELU, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JORJA WILLIAMS; MYRTLE FOUST; VERONICA MCLEAN; KAREN JONES; ALICIA OAKLEY RESENDIZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-750-1) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1594 CHRISTOPHER J. ODINKEMELU, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JORJA WILLIAMS; MYRTLE FOUST; VERONICA MCLEAN; KAREN JONES; ALICIA OAKLEY RESENDIZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-750-1) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher J. Odinkemelu, Appellant Pro Se. Peter George Pappas, Brian Stephen Clarke, ADAMS, KLEEMEIER, HAGAN, HANNAH & FOUTS, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Christopher J. Odinkemelu appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Odinkemelu v. Williams, No. CA-00-750-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 3, 2001). Defendants’ motion for sanctions is granted, and Defendants are awarded reason- able costs and attorneys’ fees. In addition, we enjoin Odinkemelu from filing any further civil actions in this court until such time as these monetary sanctions are paid, and unless a district court judge certifies that his claim is not frivolous. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2