O'Marr Reid v. State of North Carolina
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to strike [998777345-2]; granting Motion to extend reply brief page limit [998777356-2] Originating case number: 3:11-cv-00422-MOC-DSC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998838547].. [11-2385]
Appeal: 11-2385
Document: 13
Date Filed: 04/24/2012
Page: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2385
O’MARR S. REID,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:11-cv-00422-MOC-DSC)
Submitted:
April 19, 2012
Decided:
April 24, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
O’marr S. Reid, Appellant Pro Se.
David John Adinolfi, II,
Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-2385
Document: 13
Date Filed: 04/24/2012
Page: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
O’marr
accepting
the
S.
Reid
appeals
recommendation
of
the
district
the
court’s
magistrate
judge
order
and
granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss Reid’s civil complaint,
and a subsequent order denying Reid’s motion for new trial and
relief from judgment.
reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court.
00422-MOC-DSC
We have reviewed the record and find no
(W.D.N.C.
Reid v. North Carolina, No. 3:11-cvNov.
28,
2011;
Dec.
9,
2011).
We
further deny Reid’s motion to strike Appellee’s response brief,
but grant Reid’s motion to extend the reply brief page limit.
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
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?