Scinto v. Preston
Scinto v. Preston
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6058
PAUL SCINTO, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. EDWARD GLENN PRESTON; RALPH MELTON, JR.; FRANK POLUMBO; ERIC WING; THE CITY OF NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA; ESTATE OF BRIAN LEMAY, Defendants – Appellees, and E&J AUTOMOTIVE, et al.; BRIAN LEMAY, Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:03-cv-00178-H)
Submitted: July 20, 2010 Decided: August 12, 2010
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul Scinto, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. James Carlton Thornton, PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; W.
Walton Kitchin, Jr., COLOMBO, KITCHIN, JOHNSON, DUNN & BALL, LLP, Greenville, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Paul Scinto, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Scinto v. Preston, No. 4:03-cv-00178-H (E.D.N.C. May 28 & Dec. 11, 2009). We grant Scinto’s motion to exceed length limitations for his informal brief. 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.