Parker v. Milligan

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: July 21, 2005
• Docket: 04-1028
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1028

MONROE ROOSEVELT PARKER, JR.; GARY P. SIMMONS, In the Matter of the Foreclosure of a Deed of Trust executed by Gary P. Simmons, dated April 14, 2000 recorded in Book 1021, Page 628, Pitt County Registry, H. Terry Hutchens, P.A., Substitute Trustee,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

DEBRA L. MILLIGAN; H. TERRY HUTCHENS; RANDY DAVIS; COLDWELL BANKER LANDMARK PROPERTIES; TINA LOVELADY; PENNY SIMPSON; NANCY BOONE; PRUDENTIAL PRIME PROPERTIES; RICHARD LANE; BRANCH BANKING & TRUST COMPANY; IRENE FAULKNER; ANNETTE W. BOURGEOIS; JOHN H. HARMON; MARY ANN FLEMING; HOME STEPS ASSET SERVICES, Evictions; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; PITT COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT; CHARLENE S. CORBETT; PITT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CLERK’S OFFICE; FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-03-81-4-H; CA-03-454-5-H)

Submitted: July 14, 2005 Decided: July 21, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Monroe Roosevelt Parker, Jr., Gary P. Simmons, Appellants Pro Se. H. Terry Hutchens, HUTCHENS, SENTER & BRITTON, Fayetteville, North Carolina; Wayne Shelton Boyette, ROUNTREE & BOYETTE, L.L.P., Tarboro, North Carolina; Conrad E. Paysour, III, MATTOX, DAVIS & BARNHILL, Greenville, North Carolina; Danny Arthur Harrington, HARRINGTON, BRADDY & ROMARY, L.L.P., Greenville, North Carolina; Cheryl A. Marteney, WARD & SMITH, P.A., New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Monroe Roosevelt Parker, Jr., and Gary P. Simmons appeal

the district court’s order dismissing this civil action for lack of

standing. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Parker v. Milligan, Nos. CA-03-81-4-H; CA-03-

454-5-H (E.D.N.C. Nov. 18, 2003). 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

- 3 -