U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1998

Morning v. Locklear

Morning v. Locklear
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided December 1, 1998

Morning v. Locklear

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6215

VINCENT E. MORNING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

KATHY LOCKLEAR; OFFICER STUMP; OFFICER HAMMOND, Defendants - Appellees, and

P. CHAVIS; M. B. HARDIN, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-97-397-5-H)

Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 1, 1998

Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vincent E. Morning, Appellant Pro Se. William McBlief, NORTH CARO- LINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Vincent E. Morning appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Morning v. Locklear, No. CA-97-397-5-H (E.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 1998). 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.