Filed: Jun. 11, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7391 JAMES DAVID FAIRCLOTH, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RANDALL LEE, Superintendent; WADE L. MOSELEY; ALBERT MOSELEY, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:05-ct-00021-FL) Submitted: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7391 JAMES DAVID FAIRCLOTH, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RANDALL LEE, Superintendent; WADE L. MOSELEY; ALBERT MOSELEY, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:05-ct-00021-FL) Submitted: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7391 JAMES DAVID FAIRCLOTH, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RANDALL LEE, Superintendent; WADE L. MOSELEY; ALBERT MOSELEY, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:05-ct-00021-FL) Submitted: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 11, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James David Faircloth, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James David Faircloth, Sr., 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. Faircloth v. Lee, No. 5:05-ct-00021-FL (E.D.N.C. July 25, 2006). 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 -
