Filed: Mar. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7833 DAVID WATTLETON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER; ARTHUR F. BEELER; STEPHEN WILLIAMS; ANGELA WALDEN WEAVER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:02-ct-00772-F) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Decided: March 31, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Ju
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7833 DAVID WATTLETON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER; ARTHUR F. BEELER; STEPHEN WILLIAMS; ANGELA WALDEN WEAVER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:02-ct-00772-F) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Decided: March 31, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Jud..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7833 DAVID WATTLETON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER; ARTHUR F. BEELER; STEPHEN WILLIAMS; ANGELA WALDEN WEAVER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:02-ct-00772-F) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Decided: March 31, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Wattleton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: David Wattleton appeals the district court’s order granting in part, and denying in part, his motion for return of filing fees. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Wattleton v. Sawyer, No. 5:02-ct-00772-F (E.D.N.C. Oct. 10, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
