Filed: Mar. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7977 CHARLES A. BROWER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. JAMES SMITH, Defendant – Appellee, and ROY COOPER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03240-BO) Submitted: March 17, 2016 Decided: March 22,2016 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7977 CHARLES A. BROWER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. JAMES SMITH, Defendant – Appellee, and ROY COOPER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03240-BO) Submitted: March 17, 2016 Decided: March 22,2016 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles A...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7977
CHARLES A. BROWER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DR. JAMES SMITH,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
ROY COOPER,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-ct-03240-BO)
Submitted: March 17, 2016 Decided: March 22,2016
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles A. Brower, Appellant Pro Se. Kelly Street Brown,
Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, YOUNG MOORE & HENDERSON, PA,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles A. Brower appeals the district court’s order
granting Dr. James Smith’s summary judgment motion on Brower’s
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) claims, and he has filed a motion for
appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Brower’s motion for
appointment of counsel and affirm the district court’s judgment.
See Brower v. Smith, No. 5:13-ct-03240-BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 2,
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