Stephen Earl v. US
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:14-cv-00115-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000031061]. [16-1734]
Appeal: 16-1734
Doc: 26
Filed: 02/27/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1734
STEPHEN EARL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES V.A.; SLOAN D. GIBSON, Acting Secretary of
V.A.; JAMES CRANDELL, VA Employee; DENNIS MCCLAINE, VA
Employee; LONNIE HATTON, VA Employee; JOE SOVATOS, VA
Employee; E. DOUGLAS BRADSHAW, JR., VA Employee; TISHA
BALKNELL, VA Employee,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:14-cv-00115-F)
Submitted:
February 23, 2017
Decided:
February 27, 2017
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Appeal: 16-1734
Doc: 26
Filed: 02/27/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
Cedric R. Perry, PERRY & ASSOCIATES, Rocky Mount, North
Carolina, for Appellant.
John Stuart Bruce, United States
Attorney, G. Norman Acker, III, Kimberly A. Moore, Assistant
United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 16-1734
Doc: 26
Filed: 02/27/2017
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Stephen Earl appeals the district court’s order granting
summary
judgment
to
the
Federal Tort Claims Act.
no reversible error.
Government
on
his
action
under
the
We have reviewed the record and find
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court.
Earl v. United States, No. 5:14-
cv-00115-F
2016).
(E.D.N.C.
May
31,
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
3
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?