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)
02-6718•Tywann D. Smith v. Randall E. Lee
02-6718Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 24, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6718
TYWANN D. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RANDALL E. LEE; MICHAEL R. MILLS; NANCY B.
HARDY; WILLIAM MAYO; LUTHER GLOVER, III; FLOYD
HENDRICKS; DANIEL JONES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (CA-01-67-5-BR)
Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 24, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tywann D. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Buren Riley Shields, III, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Tywann D. Smith appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting
the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
Smith v. Lee, No. CA-01-67-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Mar. 27, 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.