Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

946 F.2d 884

Docket No. 90-6929.

Bailes v. Hawk

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • Robert Eugene BAILESv.K.M. HAWK, Warden, Buddy Levins, Assistant Warden, Dave Farmer, Administrative Assistant, Terry Clark, Unit Manager, Wake Forest Unit, Jerry Gaughan, Caseworker, Donna Wagoner, Counsel, Jim Brand, Unit Manager, Billy W. Boggs, Caseworker, Ronnie S. Lunsford, Counselor, Thomas S. Mortimer, Correction Officer, James D. King, ISM Officer, Ann Turner, ISM Supervisor, Fran Bateman, ISM Officer, Steve Counts, Correctional Supervisor, William E. Compston, Correctional Supervisor, B. Barnes, ISM Officer
  • Bailesv.K.M. Hawk, Warden, Buddy Levins, Assistant Warden, Dave FARMER, Administrative Assistant, Terry Clark, Unit Manager, Wake Forest Unit, Jerry Gaughan, Caseworker, Donna Wagoner, Counsel, Jim Brand, Unit Manager, Billy W. Boggs, Caseworker, Ronnie S. Lunsford, Counselor, Thomas S. Mortimer, Correction Officer, James D. King, ISM Officer, Ann Turner, ISM Supervisor, Fran Bateman, ISM Officer, Steve Counts, Correctional Supervisor, William E. Compston, Correctional Supervisor, B. Barnes, ISM Officer

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted July 31, 1991. Decided Oct. 3, 1991.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Relies on United States v. The Bank of the Metropolis · United States v. Stotts · In Re John Rodgers Burnley

Opinion by Per Curiam ·

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CA-88-818-CRT)

Robert Eugene Bailes, appellant pro se.

Eileen G. Coffey, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, N.C., for appellees.

E.D.N.C.

DISMISSED IN NO. 90-6929, AFFIRMED IN NO. 91-7565

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Robert E. Bailes appeals in No. 91-7565 from the district court's final order dismissing Bailes's Bivens* action, and in No. 90-6929 from a prior order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate and dismissing his claims for damages but staying his claim for injunctive relief pending a decision of this Court in United States v. Stotts, 925 F.2d 83 (4th Cir.1991). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that these appeals are without merit.

¶2

Accordingly, in No. 90-6929 we dismiss the appeal from the dismissal of damage claims as interlocutory and we dismiss the appeal of the stay pending our decision in Stotts as moot. In No. 91-7565, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Bailes v. Hawk, CA88-818-CRT (E.D.N.C. Apr. 1, 1991). 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.

¶3

No. 90-6929 DISMISSED, No. 91-7565 AFFIRMED.

*

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 40 U.S. 388 (1971)

/946/f2d/884 · .json · Public domain