Stevenson v. Shoup

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Stevenson v. Shoup. Read the opinion of the Court — 390 F. App'x 286
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 7, 2011·No. 09-7927·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7927

ROGER STEVENSON,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

APRIL SHOUP, Unit Manager at the Marion Correctional Institution; JASON DOBSON, Case Manager; TURNER SOUTH,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:08-cv-00305-GCM)

Submitted: March 28, 2011 Decided: April 7, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roger Stevenson, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Roger Stevenson appeals the district court’s orders

granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants in his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action and denying his

motions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 and 59(e), for a more definite

statement, and for a copy of the appellate record. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Stevenson v. Shoup, No. 3:08-cv-00305-GCM (W.D.N.C. Oct. 9,

2009; July 30, 2010; Sept. 7, 2010). 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

Stevenson v. Shoup, (4th Cir. 2011).

Stevenson v. Shoup (Stevenson v. Shoup) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related