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)
08-6258•Billy Reid Trembley v. OFFICER DAVIS, Jail Officer; OFFICER WOODS, Jail Officer
08-6258Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 16, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6258
BILLY REID TREMBLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OFFICER DAVIS, Jail Officer; OFFICER WOODS, Jail Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Jr.,
District Judge. (1:07-cv-00853-WO-WWD)
Submitted: September 11, 2008 Decided: September 16, 2008
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy Reid Trembley, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Edwin DeCicco,
TEMPLETON & RAYNOR, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Billy Reid Trembley appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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. Trembley v. Davis,
No. 1:07-cv-00853-WO-WWD (M.D.N.C. Jan. 31, 2008). We deny
Appellees’ pending motion to dismiss and amended motion to dismiss
as moot and 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.