Willis v. Department of Transportation

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 26, 2009
Docket08-1612
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. 2009).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1612

DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

JONES COUNTY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; LYNDO TIPPET; CAM MCRAE, as public official; JAY CONVERSE, as private individual 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 New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (4:07-cv-00046-FL)

Submitted: June 22, 2009 Decided: June 26, 2009

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 denying his motion to proceed informa pauperis on appeal.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. In

addition, we conclude the appeal is moot because this court

previously adjudicated the merits of the underlying action and

denied in forma pauperis status. Accordingly, we deny leave to

proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. Willis v.

Dep’t of Transp., No. 4:07-cv-00046-FL (E.D.N.C. May 12, 2008).

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-ca4-2009.