Todd v. Llewellyn

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 11, 2002
Docket02-7068
StatusUnpublished

This text of Todd v. Llewellyn (Todd v. Llewellyn) 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
Todd v. Llewellyn, (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7068

RICK TODD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PATTI LLEWELLYN; CINDY TINKHAM,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-02-313)

Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 11, 2002

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rick Todd, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Rick Todd appeals the district court’s order dismissing as

frivolous his action filed under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents

of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 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. See Todd v. Llewellyn, No. CA-02-313 (E.D.N.C. June 12,

2002). We deny Todd’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Todd v. Llewellyn, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/todd-v-llewellyn-ca4-2002.