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)
19-6425•Chris Fordham v. Corrections Officer Manzola
19-6425Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 5, 2019
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6425
CHRIS FORDHAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CORRECTIONS OFFICER MANZOLA; CORRECTIONS OFFICER STEED;
SERGEANT LEE LEWIS; W. FOX; MR. WILLIAMS; RN LEWIS; LPN
AKUCHE; CORRECTIONS OFFICER THOMAS,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
WARDEN BRANKER,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (5:16-ct-03099-BO)
Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: September 5, 2019
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher James Fordham, Appellant Pro Se.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Christopher James Fordham appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative
remedies. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Fordham v. Manzola, No. 5:16-ct-03099-
BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 13, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.