Sergeant Hypolite v. Joel Hunt Frank Coleman Walter Summer Ronald Godwin

Fourth Circuit

Sergeant Hypolite v. Joel Hunt Frank Coleman Walter Summer Ronald Godwin

72 F.3d 127, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39581, 1995 WL 736904

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 12, 1995

Docket95-7194

StatusPublished

This text of 72 F.3d 127 (Sergeant Hypolite v. Joel Hunt Frank Coleman Walter Summer Ronald Godwin) 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

Sergeant Hypolite v. Joel Hunt Frank Coleman Walter Summer Ronald Godwin, 72 F.3d 127, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39581, 1995 WL 736904 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

72 F.3d 127
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Sergeant HYPOLITE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Joel HUNT; Frank Coleman; Walter Summer; Ronald Godwin,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-7194.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 1995.
Decided Dec. 12, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-95-292-5-CT-BO)

Sergeant Hypolite, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) 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. Hypolite v. Hunt, No. CA-95-292-5-CT-BO (E.D.N.C. July 27, 1995). 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

72 F.3d 127
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Sergeant HYPOLITE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Joel HUNT; Frank Coleman; Walter Summer; Ronald Godwin,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-7194.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 1995.
Decided Dec. 12, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-95-292-5-CT-BO)

Sergeant Hypolite, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) 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. Hypolite v. Hunt, No. CA-95-292-5-CT-BO (E.D.N.C. July 27, 1995). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 F.3d 127, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39581, 1995 WL 736904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sergeant-hypolite-v-joel-hunt-frank-coleman-walter-ca4-1995.