Filed: Aug. 31, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6418 TORI NEAL, a/k/a Tory Nelson, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. POLICE OFFICER ANNA STERLING; DURHAM COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; IBRIHIM WAHEED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-00904-WO-LPA) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circ
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6418 TORI NEAL, a/k/a Tory Nelson, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. POLICE OFFICER ANNA STERLING; DURHAM COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; IBRIHIM WAHEED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-00904-WO-LPA) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6418
TORI NEAL, a/k/a Tory Nelson,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
POLICE OFFICER ANNA STERLING; DURHAM COUNTY POLICE
DEPARTMENT; IBRIHIM WAHEED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-00904-WO-LPA)
Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tori Neal, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tori Neal appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012)
and the order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter
or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Neal’s motion for
appointment of counsel and affirm the district court’s orders.
Neal v. Sterling, No. 1:13-cv-00904-WO-LPA (M.D.N.C. May 20,
2014 & Feb. 4, 2015). 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