Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Locklear v. Board of Commissioners, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Alfred and Gwen Locklear in their civil action raising claims under the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning. The Court also denied the Locklears' motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-05-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-1015

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Alfred and Gwen Locklear in their civil action raising claims under the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning. The Court also denied the Locklears' motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding 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
    12 views2 pages

    Locklear v. Board of Commissioners, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Alfred and Gwen Locklear in their civil action raising claims under the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning. The Court also denied the Locklears' motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding 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. 99-1015

    ALFRED LOCKLEAR; GWEN D. LOCKLEAR,


    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF
    HOKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; L. E. MCLAUGHLIN,
    personally; TOM HOWELL, personally; RILEY
    JORDAN, personally; DUNCAN MCFADYEN, former
    Hoke County Attorney; JAMES C. SPENCER, JR.,
    the Honorable; JERRI DUNSTON, Attorney, United
    States Department of Justice; SARA MCDONALD,
    personally; DAVID GIBSON, personally,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief
    District Judge. (CA-97-1277-1)

    Submitted:

    May 13, 1999

    Decided:

    May 18, 1999

    Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Alfred Locklear, Gwen D. Locklear, Appellants Pro Se. Tyrus Vance


    Dahl, Jr., WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Winston-Salem, North
    Carolina; Charles Jerome Murray, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
    NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina; Gill Paul Beck, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina; Lawrence
    Pierce Egerton, EGERTON & ASSOCIATES, Greensboro, North Carolina,
    for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Alfred and Gwen Locklear appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on their civil action raising claims under the Fair
    Housing Act and 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1998).

    We have re-

    viewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no
    reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

    district court. See Locklear v. Board of Commissioners, No. CA-971277-1 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 1, 1998).

    We deny the Locklears motion to

    appoint counsel and 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

    You might also like