Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 21, 2006
Docket05-1911
StatusUnpublished

This text of Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff (Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff) 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
Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff, (4th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1911

FRANKLIN C. REAVES, Reverend,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

TOWN OF FAIR BLUFF; J. B. EVANS, individually and as Mayor of the Town of Fair Bluff; WILLARD D. SMALL; CARL W. MEARES, JR.; BILLY HAMMOND; SELENA GRAHAM; JAMES H. MEARES, JR., individually and as Commissioner; LEE LEGGETT, individually and as Chief of the Town of Fair Bluff Police Department; B. T. HODGE, individually and in his official capacity; TOWN OF FAIR BLUFF POLICE DEPARTMENT; FOWLER'S AUTO SALES 24 HOUR TOWING SERVICE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-103-7-F)

Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Reverend Franklin C. Reaves, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Edwin Edes, Clay Allen Collier, CROSSLEY, MCINTOSH, PRIOR & COLLIER, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Franklin C. Reaves appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing his civil action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3) (2000)

and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. See Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff,

No. CA-03-103-7-F (E.D.N.C. May 12 and July 5, 2005). 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 -

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reaves v. Town of Fair Bluff, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reaves-v-town-of-fair-bluff-ca4-2006.