Robin Evans v. Elmer's Products, Incorporated

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for stay pending appeal [999565071-2] Originating case number: 5:11-cv-00180-RLV. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999571949]. Mailed to: Robin Evans. [14-2017]

Appeal: 14-2017

Doc: 27

Filed: 04/27/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2017

ROBIN LYNN EVANS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ELMER’S PRODUCTS, INC.; IRENE LESTER; IREDELL COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; TINA CARPENTER; BERWIND CORPORATION;
PHILLIP REDMOND, Sheriff of Iredell County; DETECTIVE SGT.
ANDY POTEAT, Detective Capt.; RHODNEY LESTER; VENICE
HERRING; ROGER POSACKI, CEO, Elmer’s Products Corporate
Headquarters,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
CHARLES MCKINNEY; THOMAS BEATTY; CITY OF STATESVILLE; ROBERT
EVANS; BONNIE HAGERMAN; VAN BILLET, CFO,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:11-cv-00180-RLV)

Submitted:

April 23, 2015

Decided:

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

April 27, 2015

Appeal: 14-2017

Doc: 27

Filed: 04/27/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

Robin Lynn Evans, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 14-2017

Doc: 27

Filed: 04/27/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

Evans

the

PER CURIAM:
Robin

Lynn

appeals

district

court’s

order

dismissing his civil complaint against Defendants and he has
filed a motion for a stay pending appeal.
record and find no reversible error.
district court’s judgment.

We have reviewed the

Accordingly, we affirm the

Evans v. Elmer’s Prods., Inc., No.

5:11-cv-00180-RLV (W.D.N.C. Sept. 10, 2014).
motion

for

a

stay

pending

appeal.

We

We deny Evans’

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