Theodus Lindsay, Jr. v. William Glick, III
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--Motion to appoint/assign counsel is denied [1000058855-2] Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00596-LCB-JLW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Theodus Lindsay. [17-6400]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
THEODUS LINDSAY, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
WILLIAM GLICK, III; MR. BRANDHORST; MS. BARRINGER; CORDELIA
MCBRIDE; EBONY RATLIFF; MR. HILDRETH; MR. HUNEYCUTT; MS.
ROBINSON; MR. LOOKABILL; MS. BRUTON; MR. PARSONS; MR.
HARGRAVE; MR. BRADFORD; MACRE CRIDER; VICTOR LOCKLEAR;
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00596-LCB-JLW)
Submitted: August 15, 2017
Decided: August 25, 2017
Before SHEDD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Theodus Lindsay, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Tammera Sudderth Hill, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Theodus Lindsay, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we deny Lindsay’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Lindsay v. Glick, No. 1:15-cv-00596-LCB-JLW (M.D.N.C.
Mar. 16, 2017). 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
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?