Barnett v. Johnson

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 30, 2002
Docket02-7125
StatusUnpublished

This text of Barnett v. Johnson (Barnett v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barnett v. Johnson, (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7125

LESTER BARNETT, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JAMES M. JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-298-1-1-MU)

Submitted: September 19, 2002 Decided: September 30, 2002

Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lester Barnett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Lester Barnett, Jr., appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. See Barnett v. Johnson, No. CA-01-298-1-1-MU (W.D.N.C. July

15, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Barnett v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-v-johnson-ca4-2002.