Filed: Aug. 28, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7545 WILLIE J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DAVID MITCHELL; MARGIE LAWLER; RICHARD TIRRELL TERRY, Defendants - Appellees, and RANDY LEE; D. S. LORD; W. D. SLEDGE; MR. PERSON; JENNIFER H. LANGLEY; LEWIS SMITH, Defendants. 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-00304-FL) Submitted: July 31, 2007 Decided:
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7545 WILLIE J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DAVID MITCHELL; MARGIE LAWLER; RICHARD TIRRELL TERRY, Defendants - Appellees, and RANDY LEE; D. S. LORD; W. D. SLEDGE; MR. PERSON; JENNIFER H. LANGLEY; LEWIS SMITH, Defendants. 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-00304-FL) Submitted: July 31, 2007 Decided: ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7545 WILLIE J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DAVID MITCHELL; MARGIE LAWLER; RICHARD TIRRELL TERRY, Defendants - Appellees, and RANDY LEE; D. S. LORD; W. D. SLEDGE; MR. PERSON; JENNIFER H. LANGLEY; LEWIS SMITH, Defendants. 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-00304-FL) Submitted: July 31, 2007 Decided: August 28, 2007 Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie J. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Willie J. Williams appeals the district court’s orders 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. Williams v. Mitchell, No. 5:05-ct-00304-FL (E.D.N.C. July 26, 2005; Aug. 18 & Oct. 12, 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 -
