The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-1579•Shekhem Bey v. Juwanna Mann Production Corporation
02-1579Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 29, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1579
SHEKHEM BEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JUWANNA MANN PRODUCTION CORPORATION; MOGAN
CREEK PRODUCTION INCORPORATED; IN DRAG
PRODUCTION CORPORATION; WARNER BROTHERS
PRODUCTION, INCORPORATED; WARNER BROTHERS
PICTURES, INCORPORATED; TIME WARNER PRODUCTION
CORPORATION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CA-02-20-3-V)
Submitted: July 19, 2002 Decided: July 29, 2002
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Shekhem Bey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Shekhem Bey appeals the district court’s order denying the
request to certify registration of an apparently fraudulent
judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1963 (West Supp. 2002). 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 Bey v. Juwanna Mann Prod., No. CA-02-20-3-V
(W.D.N.C. May 3, 2002). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.