Tucker v. Marshall

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

No. 95-7675 D. MARSHALL, W.S.P.D.; C. J.

WARREN, W.S.P.D.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem.

N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (CA-90-606-6)

Submitted: January 18, 1996

Decided: February 12, 1996

Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. _________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Judge Luttig wrote a concurring opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL

Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Pierce Egerton, Dewey Wallace Wells, Ursula Marie Henninger, WOMBLE, CAR- LYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). _________________________________________________________________ OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tucker v. Marshall, No. CA-90-606-6 (M.D.N.C. July 19, 1991 & Oct. 6, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to disqualify three judges of this court because he has not established bias or prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 455 (1988). We deny Appellant's motion for production of docu- ments and a transcript 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

LUTTIG, Circuit Judge, concurring:

Appellant has filed 123 appeals in this court between October 22, 1993, and today. I would impose sanctions against Appellant for abuse of the judicial process.