Filed: Oct. 23, 2020
Latest Update: Oct. 23, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6518 CASEY RAFAEL TYLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KATY POOLE; LACHELLE BULLARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:17-cv-01104-WO-JLW) Submitted: October 20, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpubli
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6518 CASEY RAFAEL TYLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KATY POOLE; LACHELLE BULLARD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:17-cv-01104-WO-JLW) Submitted: October 20, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublis..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6518
CASEY RAFAEL TYLER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KATY POOLE; LACHELLE BULLARD,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:17-cv-01104-WO-JLW)
Submitted: October 20, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Casey Rafael Tyler, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Casey Rafael Tyler appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation
of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Tyler’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Tyler v. Poole, No. 1:17-cv-01104-WO-JLW
(M.D.N.C. Mar. 31, 2020). 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