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)
07-4689•Rickie Joseph Anderson v. Pharmacist Julie Finch
07-4689Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 4, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6692
RICKIE JOSEPH ANDERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PHARMACIST JULIE FINCH; LT. MACK; SGT. K. HALLMAN; DR. CONNIE
VICE; DR. HERBERT MYLES; DR. MICHAEL WEINSTEIN; DANIEL
JOHNSON; JUDGE J. B. ALLEN; H. G. ALEXANDER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (5:08-ct-03002-FL)
Submitted: September 16, 2008 Decided: September 22, 2008
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rickie Joseph Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Rickie Joseph Anderson 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. Anderson v.
Finch, No. 5:08-ct-03002-FL (E.D.N.C. Mar. 26, 2008). 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.