# Thomas Covington, Jr. v. Betty Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · August 26, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11128494

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 26, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11128494

## Opinion text

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6227 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/26/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6227

THOMAS COVINGTON, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BETTY BROWN; KATY POOLE; CHARLIE LOCKLEAR; SARAH MCLUCAS-
FLOYD; REGINALD J. BOWENS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:21-cv-00385-WO-JEP)

Submitted: August 21, 2025 Decided: August 26, 2025

Before WILKINSON, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Covington, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 25-6227 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/26/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Covington, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendants in

Covington’s civil action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use

and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc to 2000cc-5. We have

reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district

court’s judgment. Covington v. Brown, No. 1:21-cv-00385-WO-JEP (M.D.N.C.

Mar. 3, 2025). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11128494. Public record. Not legal advice.