Timothy King v. Erik Hooks
Timothy King v. Erik Hooks
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6561
TIMOTHY ROYAL KING, Plaintiff - Appellant, and MICHAEL BLANKEY; DERICK WHITE; DAYVON D. PERSON; LARRY FULLER; TIMOTHY BOYD; CHRIS PEARSALL; JIMMY TINSLEY; RONALD BLAIR WINSTEAD; GREGORY PORTER; CORTNEY LEACH; MILTON L.
LAWRENCE; JOHN MCNEILL; XAVIER KINNEY; IRVIN VASQUEZ; DONALD USEVICH, Plaintiffs, v. ERIK A. HOOKS; W. DAVID GUICE; CYNTHIA THORNTON; MELANIE SHELTON; KENNETH LASSITER; BETTY BROWN; SUSAN ADDAMS, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:17-ct-03043-FL)
Submitted: January 25, 2022 Decided: February 7, 2022
Before AGEE, HARRIS, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Royal King, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Timothy Royal King appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment on his civil rights complaint in which he raised claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc to 2000cc-5. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. King v. Hooks, No. 5:17-ct-03043-FL (E.D.N.C. Mar. 31, 2020; Mar. 29, 2021). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.