Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • William Parker v. Ripley Rand, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which William S. Parker appealed a district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against three defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found Parker's appeal to be frivolous, dismissing the appeal for the same reasons provided by the district court in its October 18, 2012 order dismissing the initial complaint. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-04-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7862

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a court case in which William S. Parker appealed a district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against three defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found Parker's appeal to be frivolous, dismissing the appeal for the same reasons provided by the district court in its October 18, 2012 order dismissing the initial complaint. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    William Parker v. Ripley Rand, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which William S. Parker appealed a district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against three defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found Parker's appeal to be frivolous, dismissing the appeal for the same reasons provided by the district court in its October 18, 2012 order dismissing the initial complaint. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 12-7862

    WILLIAM S. PARKER,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    RIPLEY RAND, Superior Court Judge; TOM FORD, Assistant
    District Attorney; CONNIE R. EASON, Extradition Secretary,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (5:11-ct-03201-F)

    Submitted:

    March 28, 2013

    Decided:

    April 1, 2013

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    William S. Parker, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    William S. Parker appeals the district courts order
    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
    1915(e)(2)(B) (2006).
    that

    this

    appeal

    is

    We have reviewed the record and find

    frivolous.

    Accordingly,

    we

    dismiss

    appeal for the reasons stated by the district court.


    Rand, No. 5:11-ct-03201-F (E.D.N.C. Oct. 18, 2012).

    the

    Parker v.
    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.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like