Everett v. Wilkerson

Fourth Circuit

Everett v. Wilkerson

127 F. App'x 670

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 4, 2005·No. No. 04-7933·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Lonnie Everett appeals the district court’s order dismissing as time-barred his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Everett v. Wilkerson, No. CA-04-569-5-4 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 20, 2004). 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

PER CURIAM:

Lonnie Everett appeals the district court’s order dismissing as time-barred his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Everett v. Wilkerson, No. CA-04-569-5-4 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 20, 2004). 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

Everett v. Wilkerson, 127 F. App'x 670 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

127 F. App'x 670 (Everett v. Wilkerson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related