U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2000

Fordham v. NC Department Corr

Fordham v. NC Department Corr
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 21, 2000

Fordham v. NC Department Corr

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7720

CHRISTOPHER JAMES FORDHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; MACK JARVIS; FRANKLIN FREEMAN; LYNN C. PHILLIPS; RANDALL LEE; RICHARD T. DUKE, JR.; RICKY ROBINSON; MR. MCWILLIAMS; SERGEANT WIGGINS; SERGEANT DELOATCH; W. SLEDGE, SR.; OFFICER DILLARD; OFFICER ROWE; OFFICER PRIMUS; OFFICER MITCHELL, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CA-98-789-5-BO)

Submitted: August 31, 2000 Decided: September 21, 2000

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher James Fordham, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Ray Garvey, OF- FICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Christopher James Fordham appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) com- plaint. 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. See Fordham v. North Carolina Dep’t of Corr., No. CA-98-789-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 16, 1999).

Fordham’s request for injunctive relief is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately 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.