George Bratton v. State of North Carolina, No. 16-2028 (4th Cir. 2016)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2028 GEORGE ANDREW BRATTON, an individual, Plaintiff – Appellant, and THE ESTATE OF GEENA GEE BRATTON, Decedent, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, a Business Entity or Governmental Agency; PAT MCCORY, Gov., an Individual; MECKLENBURG COUNTY DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES, (DSS), a Business Entity or Governmental Agency; PEGGY EAGAN, Director of DSS, an individual; CHRIS TAYLOR, badge #211 in his individual and official capacity of Lieutenant; MCDOWELL COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT; CEDERBROOK RESIDENTIAL CENTER, a business entity; THE ESTATE OF HENRY ROBERT BRATTON, JR., Deceased; MARIAN DIEBEL-BRATTON, individual; ARLENE BROKAW, individual and in her official capacity; MCEWEN FUNERAL SERVICE PINEVILLE CHAPEL CITY, a business entity; NORTH CAROLINA ADOPTION AGENCY, a business entity or governmental agency, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-cv-00021-FL) Submitted: December 15, 2016 Decided: December 19, 2016 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Andrew Bratton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: George Andrew Bratton appeals the district court’s order dismissing his jurisdiction. reversible complaint We error. have for lack reviewed Accordingly, we the of subject record deny and Bratton’s matter find no motion to assign counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bratton (E.D.N.C. Aug. 31, v. North 2016). Carolina, We dispense No. 5:16-cv-00021-FL 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

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.