Willis v. Department of Transportation

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 18, 2008
Docket08-1054
StatusUnpublished

This text of Willis v. Department of Transportation (Willis v. Department of Transportation) 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
Willis v. Department of Transportation, (4th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1054

DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

JONES COUNTY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; LYNDO TIPPETT; CAM MCRAE, as public official; JAY CONVERSE, as private individuals and/or their successors; TANDS INCORPORATION, as private individuals and/or their successors,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (4:07-cv-00046-FL)

Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 18, 2008

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel Johnson Willis, Appellant Pro Se. Scott A. Conklin, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Nicole A. Crawford, BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON, HUMPHREY & LEONARD, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Daniel Johnson Willis appeals the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and

find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we deny leave

to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the

reasons stated by the district court. Willis v. Dep’t of

Transp., No. 4:07-cv-00046-FL (E.D.N.C. Dec. 12, 2007). 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.

DISMISSED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Willis v. Department of Transportation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willis-v-department-of-transportation-ca4-2008.