Filed: Apr. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7639 JAMES ANTHONY BARNETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. CLIFFORD CURTIS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03056-FL) Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7639 JAMES ANTHONY BARNETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. CLIFFORD CURTIS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03056-FL) Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James A..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7639 JAMES ANTHONY BARNETT, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. CLIFFORD CURTIS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03056-FL) Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Anthony Barnett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, YOUNG MOORE & HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Anthony Barnett, Jr., appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendant and dismissing Barnett’s civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barnett v. Curtis, No. 5:16-ct-03056-FL (E.D.N.C. Dec. 6, 2017). 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
