Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cannon v. Swindell, 02-1077 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-1077 Visitors: 1
Filed: May 06, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1077 HAYWOOD ALLEN CANNON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LEWIS H. SWINDELL, IV; NORMAN EDWARD WIGGINS, Individually and in his capacity as administrator; MARVIN EUGENE WIGGINS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-82-7-BR) Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 6, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and K
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1077 HAYWOOD ALLEN CANNON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LEWIS H. SWINDELL, IV; NORMAN EDWARD WIGGINS, Individually and in his capacity as administrator; MARVIN EUGENE WIGGINS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-82-7-BR) Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 6, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Haywood Allen Cannon, Appellant Pro Se. Lewis H. Swindell, IV, Norman Edward Wiggins, Marvin Eugene Wiggins, Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Haywood Allen Cannon 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 accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Cannon v. Swindell, No. CA-01-82-7-BR (E.D.N.C. Dec. 17, 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