Filed: Nov. 29, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7159 HAROLD W. FOSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and PHILLIP TURPEN; MICHAEL SIMMONS, Plaintiffs, versus THEODIS BECK; WILLARD JOBE; SANDRA PITMAN; JACK LOUDER; UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-05-232-03-MU-1) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 29, 2005
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7159 HAROLD W. FOSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and PHILLIP TURPEN; MICHAEL SIMMONS, Plaintiffs, versus THEODIS BECK; WILLARD JOBE; SANDRA PITMAN; JACK LOUDER; UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-05-232-03-MU-1) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 29, 2005 B..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7159 HAROLD W. FOSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and PHILLIP TURPEN; MICHAEL SIMMONS, Plaintiffs, versus THEODIS BECK; WILLARD JOBE; SANDRA PITMAN; JACK LOUDER; UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-05-232-03-MU-1) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 29, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harold W. Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Harold W. Foster appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Foster v. Beck, No. CA-05-232-03-MU-1 (W.D.N.C. filed July 7, 2005 & entered July 8, 2005). We deny Foster’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 - 3 -
