Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Paylor v. Sutton, 03-7342 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-7342 Visitors: 21
Filed: Nov. 20, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7342 REGINALD E. PAYLOR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST SUTTON, Superintendent; JAY MARROW, Medical Administrator; MICHAEL BAKER, Administrative Officer; DAVID O’NEIL, Clothes House Officer; SIVARA MANICKAVASAGAR, Doctor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-507-5-BO) Submitted: Novem
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7342 REGINALD E. PAYLOR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ERNEST SUTTON, Superintendent; JAY MARROW, Medical Administrator; MICHAEL BAKER, Administrative Officer; DAVID O’NEIL, Clothes House Officer; SIVARA MANICKAVASAGAR, Doctor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-507-5-BO) Submitted: November 6, 2003 Decided: November 20, 2003 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald E. Paylor, Appellant Pro Se. Deborrah Lynn Newton, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; John Walton Minier, YATES, MCLAMB & WEYHER, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM Reginald Paylor appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants and dismissing Paylor’s action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Paylor v. Sutton, No. CA-02-507-5-BO (E.D.N.C. July 31, 2003). 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