# Mallard v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 28, 1996

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/989432

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 28, 1996
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/989432

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-3000

JAMES MALLARD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BRUCE BROWN, in his individual capacity;
WILLIAM KEEN, in his individual capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (CV-95-55-2-BO)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: May 28, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Mallard, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recom-

mendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis,
we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Mallard v. Brown,
No. CV-95-55-2-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 13, 1995). 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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/989432. Public record. Not legal advice.