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)
05-7525•Stuart A. Middleton v. G. A. Jones
05-7525Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 2, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7525
STUART A. MIDDLETON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
G. A. JONES; J. SCHIFFIANO; JOHN DAVIS,
Sergeant; H. WEBSTER; S. WARREN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (CA-04-406)
Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 2, 2006
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stuart A. Middleton, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Stuart A. Middleton appeals from the district court’s
order denying his third motion for reconsideration of the dismissal
of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Middleton v. Jones, No. CA-04-406 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 18,
2005). 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.