Derek Hendricks v. Mr. Casina
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:13-ct-03090-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [1000006265]. Mailed to: Derek Hendricks. [16-6917]
Appeal: 16-6917
Doc: 24
Filed: 01/19/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6917
DEREK HENDRICKS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. CASINA, Medical Supervisor; DOCTOR OWENS; NURSE NELSON,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
SUPERINTENDENT KORNEGAY; MR. HAWKINS;
HARRELL, Assistant Superintendent,
DR.
DAVIS;
MS.
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:13-ct-03090-D)
Submitted:
January 17, 2017
Decided:
January 19, 2017
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derek Hendricks, Appellant Pro Se.
Joseph Finarelli, Special
Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Ginger Bagley
Hunsucker, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, LLP, Raleigh, North
Carolina; Kelly Street Brown, Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, YOUNG
Appeal: 16-6917
Doc: 24
Filed: 01/19/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
MOORE & HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 16-6917
Doc: 24
Filed: 01/19/2017
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Derek
granting
Hendricks
Defendants
appeals
summary
the
judgment
district
on
court’s
Hendricks’
orders
42
U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) complaint, in which Hendricks alleged an Eighth
Amendment
medical
claim
of
condition,
deliberate
and
for reconsideration.
reversible error.
denying
indifference
Hendricks’
to
his
serious
postjudgment
motion
We have reviewed the record and find no
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court.
See Hendricks v. Casina, No. 5:13-ct-
03090-D (E.D.N.C. Oct. 20, 2015 & June 23, 2016).
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?