Derek Hendricks v. Mr. Casina


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6917 Doc: 24 Filed: 01/19/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6917 DEREK HENDRICKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR.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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-6917 Doc: 24 Filed: 01/19/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Derek granting Hendricks Defendants appeals summary the judgment district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?