Adam Pugh v. John Ingram


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998987248-2] Originating case number: 5:12-ct-03027-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999005108]. Mailed to: Adam Pugh. [12-7174]

Download PDF
Appeal: 12-7174 Doc: 13 Filed: 12/18/2012 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7174 ADAM CLAYTON PUGH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SHERIFF JOHN INGRAM; CAPTAIN DAVIS; CAPTAIN EVANS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:12-ct-03027-FL) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adam Clayton Pugh, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 12-7174 Doc: 13 Filed: 12/18/2012 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Adam Clayton Pugh appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2006). and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pugh v. Ingram, No. 5:12- ct-03027-FL (E.D.N.C. July 3, 2012). We deny Pugh’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 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?