Judson Witham v. DEC New York State
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [1000145188-2] Originating case number: 5:17-cv-00171-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Judson Witham 15215 Aiken Road Wake Forest, NC 27587. [17-1791]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff - Appellant,
DEC NEW YORK STATE; STATE OF NEW YORK; ANDREW CUOMO,
Governor; BASIL SEGGOS, Commissioner DEC; UNKNOWN JOHN AND
JANE DOE'S AGENTS; EMPLOYEES FOR THE NEW YORK STATE; 1-10
BIVENS ACTION; WARREN COUNTY, NEW YORK; NYS DEC; THE LAKE
GEORGE PARK COMMISSION; NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:17-cv-00171-BO)
Submitted: October 19, 2017
Decided: October 23, 2017
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Judson Witham, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Judson Witham appeals the district court’s order dismissing pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012), his civil complaint in which he asserted claims against various
New York individuals and entities arising out of their construction, operation, and
maintenance of dams, resulting in the destruction of lakes and land, including Witham’s
family’s property and marina. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Witham v. DEC New
York State, No. 5:17-cv-00171-BO (E.D.N.C. May 31, 2017).
We deny Witham’s
motion for 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.
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?