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)
06-1297•Gene Surles Corpening v. Larry Leder
06-1297Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 4, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1297
GENE SURLES CORPENING,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LARRY LEDER; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (5:05-cv-00024)
Submitted: July 26, 2006 Decided: August 4, 2006
Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gene Surles Corpening, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Leslie Baker,
Andrea R. Tebbets, Gretchen M. Wolfinger, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Gene Surles Corpening appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corpening v.
Leder, No. 5:05-cv-00024 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2006). We deny the
pending motions for sanctions and Corpening’s motion to stay the
case. 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.