Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    Curbelo v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Francisco Curbelo filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against officials at the Mecklenburg County Jail alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied Curbelo relief. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Curbelo v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    Francisco Curbelo filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against officials at the Mecklenburg County Jail alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied Curbelo relief. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7175

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Francisco Curbelo filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against officials at the Mecklenburg County Jail alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied Curbelo relief. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    9 views2 pages

    Curbelo v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Francisco Curbelo filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against officials at the Mecklenburg County Jail alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied Curbelo relief. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-7175

    FRANCISCO CURBELO,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JIM PENDERGRAPH, Sheriff; ELAINE GRAVITT,
    Nurse; NORMAN H. GOODE, Captain; DENNIS RAY
    SUMMERS, Sergeant; G. MILLER, Mecklenburg
    County Jail Officer; WADE ROBINSON SKINNER,
    Mecklenburg County Jail Officer,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior
    District Judge. (3:04-cv-00021)

    Submitted:

    April 25, 2007

    Decided:

    June 15, 2007

    Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Francisco Curbelo, Appellant Pro Se.


    Scott Douglas MacLatchie,
    Sean Francis Perrin, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC,
    Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Francisco Curbelo appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

    Curbelo v.

    Pendergraph, No. 3:04-cv-00021 (W.D.N.C. June 19, 2006).

    We

    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like