Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
14-1947•Eddie Wise; Dorothy Monroe-Wise v. United States Department of Agriculture
14-1947Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit03.02.2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1947
EDDIE WISE; DOROTHY MONROE-WISE,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; JAMES DAVENPORT,
Individually; MIKE HUSKEY, Individually; AARON A. MARTIN,
Individually; JUAN M. GARCIA, Individually; TOM VILSACK, In
his official capacity as the Secretary of the United States
Department of Agriculture; PAULA F. NICHOLLS, Individually;
DEBBIE HOUSTON, Individually; CYNTHIA I. KERNODLE,
Individually; JOE LEONARD, In his official capacity as
Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights of United States
Department of Agriculture,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (4:13-cv-00234-BO)
Submitted: January 16, 2015 Decided: February 3, 2015
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eddie Wise, Dorothy Monroe-Wise, Appellants Pro Se. Neal
Fowler, Assistant United States Attorney, Thomas Gray Walker,
-- 1 of 3 --
2
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Appellants Eddie Wise and Dorothy Monroe-Wise appeal
the district court’s orders denying their motion for an
evidentiary hearing and granting the Defendants’ motion to
dismiss their civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Wise v. U.S. Dep’t of
Agric., No. 4:13-cv-00234-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 27, 2014; Aug. 19,
2014). We grant Appellants leave to proceed in forma pauperis
but deny their other pending motions. 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.