Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    Myron Nunn v. N.C. Legislation, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Myron Nunn's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Myron Nunn v. N.C. Legislation, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Myron Nunn's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-10-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-6902

    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 affirmed the district court's dismissal of Myron Nunn's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

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

    Myron Nunn v. N.C. Legislation, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Myron Nunn's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    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. 15-6902

    MYRON RODERICK NUNN,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    N.C. LEGISLATION; FRANK L. PERRY; GEORGE T. SOLOMON; FINESSE
    COUCH; TODD PINION; ROBERT JONES; BELINDA DUDLEY; RICHARD
    NEELY; DEAN LOCKLEAR; TIM CURLY; ROBERT WILLIAMS; JAMES
    HOLMES; ANGIE BENGE; JEFF WILKERSON; MRS. CAMERON; MR.
    SANDERS; MR. MCCLAIN; DR. MILTON D. WESTBERG; NURSE NELSON;
    DR. LANCE; NC DPS UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD; MR. PRICE; MS.
    CLARK; COL RESPASS; RICKY MATTHEWS,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Louise W. Flanagan,
    District Judge. (5:14-ct-03190-FL)

    Submitted:

    October 15, 2015

    Decided:

    October 20, 2015

    Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Myron Roderick Nunn, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Myron

    Roderick

    Nunn

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    orders

    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.


    1915(e)(2)(B)

    (2012)

    and

    have

    denying
    the

    motion

    record

    and

    find

    for

    reconsideration.

    We

    reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    reviewed

    his

    no

    Nunn v. N.C. Legislation, No. 5:14-ct-

    03190-FL (E.D.N.C. April 15, 2015; June 8, 2015).

    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

    You might also like