Myron Nunn v. N.C. Legislation


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-ct-03190-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999681616]. Mailed to: Nunn. [15-6902]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6902 Doc: 15 Filed: 10/20/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6902 MYRON RODERICK NUNN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. N.C. LEGISLATION; FRANK L. PERRY; GEORGE T. SOLOMON; FINESSE COUCH; TODD PINION; ROBERT JONES; BELINDA DUDLEY; RICHARD NEELY; DEAN LOCKLEAR; TIM CURLY; ROBERT WILLIAMS; JAMES HOLMES; ANGIE BENGE; JEFF WILKERSON; MRS. CAMERON; MR. SANDERS; MR. MCCLAIN; DR. MILTON D. WESTBERG; NURSE NELSON; DR. LANCE; NC DPS UTILIZATION REVIEW BOARD; MR. PRICE; MS. CLARK; COL RESPASS; RICKY MATTHEWS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:14-ct-03190-FL) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Myron Roderick Nunn, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6902 Doc: 15 Filed: 10/20/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Myron Roderick Nunn appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and have denying the motion record and find for reconsideration. We reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. reviewed his no Nunn v. N.C. Legislation, No. 5:14-ct- 03190-FL (E.D.N.C. April 15, 2015; June 8, 2015). 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?