U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1997

Hernandez v. Hoffman

Hernandez v. Hoffman
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 18, 1997

Hernandez v. Hoffman

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2780

OPAL HERNANDEZ, wife of James Hernandez; JAMES HERNANDEZ, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus ARTHUR H. HOFFMAN; MARY C. HOFFMAN, wife of Arthur H. Hoffman; RAND W. HOFFMAN; CHERYL HOFFMAN, wife of Rand W. Hoffman; LAURA J.

WETSCH, Attorney at Law; DANNY LEE ALLEN, Deputy Sheriff of Johnston County; R. FRANK GRAY, Attorney at Law, Defendants - Appellees, and

KNOX V. JENKINS, Judge of Superior Court, County of Johnston, Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-96-543-5-BR) Submitted: March 13, 1997 Decided: March 18, 1997

Before HALL, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Opal Hernandez, James Hernandez, Appellants Pro Se. Ralph Frank Gray, Laura J. Wetsch, JORDAN, PRICE, WALL, GRAY & JONES, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina; Howard Edwards Manning, Sr., Kristen Gardner Lingo, MANNING, FULTON & SKINNER, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation dismissing their 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 (1994) action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hernandez v. Hoffman, No. CA-96-543-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Nov. 6, 1996). 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.