Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Daye v. Brannon, 01-1917 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-1917 Visitors: 2
Filed: Dec. 05, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1917 BONNIE LEE DAYE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ANTHONY M. BRANNON, in his individual capacity as State Official; E. C. BRYSON, in his indi- vidual capacity as Counsel for Defense, his estate as real parties in interest, 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-00-592-1) Submitted: November 29, 20
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1917 BONNIE LEE DAYE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ANTHONY M. BRANNON, in his individual capacity as State Official; E. C. BRYSON, in his indi- vidual capacity as Counsel for Defense, his estate as real parties in interest, 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-00-592-1) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 5, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bonnie Lee Daye, Appellant Pro Se. Mark John Pletzke, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Bonnie Lee Daye appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) 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. Daye v. Brannon, No. CA-00-592-1 (M.D.N.C. May 22, 2001). 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
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