Powell v. Keller
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ROSE C. POWELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TONY A. KELLER; JORGE SOSA; JASON COY REID; TIMOTHY JAMES BREWER; LARRY WATERS; WILLIAM A. BRAFFORD; GRETCHEN C. F. SHAPPERT; RICHARD L. VOORHEES; MAGISTRATE JUDGE CARL HORN; GREGORY A. FOREST; JAYME MILLER; UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE; CATAWBA COUNTY; CATAWBA COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; SHERIFF OF CATAWBA COUNTY; CATAWBA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; COLDWELL BANKER; BOYD HASSELL INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES; ELVALORIE MATTHEWS; RICHARD MCDONNELL; MARK T. CALLOWAY; NEWTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CONOVER POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:03-cv-00160)
November 15, 2006
Decided:November 17, 2006
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rose C. Powell, Appellant Pro Se. James Redfern Morgan, Jr., WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina; Elizabeth Ann Martineau, HEDRICK, EATMAN, GARDNER & KINCHELOE, Charlotte, North Carolina; Scott Douglas MacLatchie, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Jennifer Ann Youngs, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; William Anthony Navarro, WISHART, NORRIS, HENNINGER & PITTMAN, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM: Rose C. Powell appeals the district court's order denying relief on her motion for a hearing, her civil rights complaint, and her motion for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. According, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Powell v. Keller, No. 5:03-CVWe deny Powell's motions for
00160-5-MU (W.D.N.C. Aug. 1, 2006).
judicial notice and to dismiss defendant-appellee's motion for summary judgment and informal briefs. 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.
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?