Tucker v. Miller

Fourth Circuit

Tucker v. Miller

38 F.3d 1213, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36637, 1994 WL 559236

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 13, 1994

Docket94-6815

StatusPublished

This text of 38 F.3d 1213 (Tucker v. Miller) 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

Tucker v. Miller, 38 F.3d 1213, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36637, 1994 WL 559236 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

38 F.3d 1213
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
James L. MILLER; Lieutenant Walker; Captain McCabe; Gary
Dixon; Deputy Warden French; Mail Clerk Jones; Sergeant
Harris; Cheryl Moody; James C. Fox, United States District
Judge; Jim Hunt, Governor; Clerk Kennedy, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6815.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted August 25, 1994.
Decided October 13, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-94-84-5-BR)

Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying leave to file a complaint pursuant to a pre-filing injunction. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tucker v. Miller, No. CA-94-84-5-BR (E.D.N.C. July 8, 1994). 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

38 F.3d 1213
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
James L. MILLER; Lieutenant Walker; Captain McCabe; Gary
Dixon; Deputy Warden French; Mail Clerk Jones; Sergeant
Harris; Cheryl Moody; James C. Fox, United States District
Judge; Jim Hunt, Governor; Clerk Kennedy, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6815.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted August 25, 1994.
Decided October 13, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-94-84-5-BR)

Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying leave to file a complaint pursuant to a pre-filing injunction. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Tucker v. Miller, No. CA-94-84-5-BR (E.D.N.C. July 8, 1994). 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)

38 F.3d 1213, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36637, 1994 WL 559236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-miller-ca4-1994.