Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Traynham v. Tyler, 01-7506 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7506 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 11, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7506 PAUL DOUGLAS TRAYNHAM, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRENCE TYLER; LUTHER GLOVER, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-134-5-BR) Submitted: January 7, 2002 Decided: March 11, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7506 PAUL DOUGLAS TRAYNHAM, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRENCE TYLER; LUTHER GLOVER, Defendants - Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-134-5-BR) Submitted: January 7, 2002 Decided: March 11, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary S. Mercer, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Caro- lina, for Appellants. Letitia C. Echols, NORTH CAROLINA PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES, INC., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellants, North Carolina correctional officers, appeals the district court’s order denying their motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recom- mendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Traynham v. Tyler, No. CA-00-134-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Aug. 8, 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