John F. Godfrey v. Davie County Authorities

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1266
JOHN F. GODFREY; PATRICIA GODFREY; F. G.;
J. K. K. G.; J. H. G.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
DAVIE COUNTY AUTHORITIES; KAREN SMITH,
Director, Davie County DSS; CINDY JUSTICE,
Social Worker, DSS, Davie County; MARCHEETA
WILLIAMS, Supervisor, DSS, Davie County; BOB
DEWITT; LORIE HAMILTON DEWITT,
Plaintiffs - Appellees.
No. 04-1267
JOHN F. GODFREY; PATRICIA GODFREY; J. K. K. G.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
DAVIE COUNTY; DAVIE COUNTY AUTHORITIES;
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; DIRECTOR,
Defendants - Appellees.

-- 1 of 4 --

- 2 -
No. 04-1268
JOHN F. GODFREY; PATRICIA GODFREY; F. G.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
DAVIE COUNTY; DAVIE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES;
DIRECTOR,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 04-1269
JOHN F. GODFREY; PATRICIA GODFREY; J. H. G.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
DAVIE COUNTY; DAVIE COUNTY DSS; DIRECTOR,
DAVIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-03-1222-1, CA-03-1223-1, CA-03-1224-1, CA-03-
1225-1)
Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 21, 2004
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

-- 2 of 4 --

- 3 -
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John F. Godfrey, Patricia Godfrey, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 3 of 4 --

- 4 -
PER CURIAM:
John and Patricia Godfrey and minor children F. G.,
J. K. K. G., and J. H. G. appeal the district court’s orders
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and habeas corpus petitions
for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Godfrey v. Davie County, Nos. CA-03-1222-
1, CA-03-1223-1, CA-03-1224-1, CA-03-1225-1 (M.D.N.C. filed Jan. 22
& entered Jan. 23, 2004). 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

-- 4 of 4 --