Stuart Tompkins v. Sandra Thomas, No. 12-6723 (4th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6723 STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SUPERINTENDENT SANDRA THOMAS, Department of Correction; KENNETH HUNT; COLBERT L. RESPASS; DAVID W. KEYS; J. HAYNES; WILLIAM BASNIGHT, III; HATTIE B. PIMPONG; PAMELA J. LOCKLEAR; ROSE LOCKLEAR; BILLIE J. WEAVER; JOHN DOE LOCKLEAR; CLIFTON SUTTON; PAUL TAYLOR; JOHN DOE HUNT, Assistant Superintendent; LYNN HENRY; JOHN DOE HUNT, Sergeant; JOHN/JANE DOE, Transfer Coordinator; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE, Captain; M. C. LOCKLEAR; JOHN DOE, Director Classification Committee; GEORGE BOYSDEN; MARSHALL PIKE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:11-ct-03049-D) Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 13, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stuart Wayne Tompkins appeals the district court s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. the record and find no reversible error. for the reasons stated by the We have reviewed Accordingly, we affirm district court. Tompkins v. Thomas, No. 5:11-ct-03049-D (E.D.N.C. Nov. 7, 2011 & Apr. 5, 2012). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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.