Linda Evans v. Pitt County Dept Soc Svc


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999584455-2]. Originating case number: 4:12-cv-00226-FL. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999671079]. Mailed to: Linda Evans. [15-1528]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1528 Doc: 14 Filed: 10/02/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1528 LINDA A. EVANS, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. PITT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES; GEORGE L. PERRY, Director of Pitt County Social Services in his official capacity; APRIL HANNING, in her individual capacity; CYNTHIA M. ROSS, in her individual capacity; LINDA MARTIN CURTIS, in her individual capacity; LINDA MILLION, in her individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:12-cv-00226-FL) Submitted: September 29, 2015 Before WILKINSON and Senior Circuit Judge. DUNCAN, Decided: Circuit Judges, October 2, 2015 and HAMILTON, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linda A. Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Scott Christopher Hart, SUMRELL, SUGG, CARMICHAEL, HICKS & HART, PA, New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees. Linda Martin Curtis, Appellee Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1528 Doc: 14 Filed: 10/02/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Linda A. Evans filed a complaint against the Pitt County Department of Social Services (“DSS”), George Perry, April Hanning, Cynthia Ross, Linda Million, and Linda Curtis alleging claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) and under state law. The district court accepted the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissed all of Evans’ claims against DSS, Perry, Ross, and Million except her claims of procedural due process violations. * The court later granted summary judgment in favor of Curtis on Evans’ remaining claims. record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm the district court’s facts orders. and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument contentions are adequately this and argument court because presented would not the in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * On Perry, Ross, and Million’s previous appeal of the district court’s interlocutory order denying them absolute immunity from Evans’ claims of procedural due process violations, we vacated the portion of the district court’s order allowing those claims to go forward and remanded with instructions to dismiss those claims. Those issues are therefore not before this court in the current appeal. 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?