Petersen v. Rawls
This text of Petersen v. Rawls (Petersen v. Rawls) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6563
ALLAN A. PETERSEN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LAVEDA RAWLS; TONY BAKER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-178-5-BO)
Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 6, 2003
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Allan A. Petersen, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Allan A. Petersen appeals the district court’s order denying
his civil rights action. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Petersen v. Rawls, No. CA-03-178-5-BO
(E.D.N.C. Mar. 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Petersen v. Rawls, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petersen-v-rawls-ca4-2003.