Theodore Justice v. Peter White, No. 14-1153 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1153 THEODORE JUSTICE, Plaintiff Appellant, v. PETER WHITE, Vance County Sheriff; SAMUEL BOOTH CURRIN, Vance County District Attorney; ALLISON S. CAPPS, Vance County Assistant District Attorney; HENRY W. HIGHT, JR., Senior Resident Superior Court Judge; THOMAS S. HESTER, JR., Chairman Vance County; THERESA JOMO, LPN, Vance County Detention Center, Defendants Appellees, and NURSE TERRY, Vance County Detention Center, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-cv-00548-FL) Submitted: June 26, 2014 Decided: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. July 1, 2014 Theodore Justice, Appellant Pro Se. James R. Morgan, Jr., WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Kristen Yarbrough Riggs, WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina; Grady L. Balentine, Jr., Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Walter Gregory Merritt, Jay C. Salsman, HARRIS, CREECH, WARD & BLACKERBY, New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Theodore accepting the Justice appeals recommendation of the district the magistrate dismissing Justice s civil rights action. record and find no reversible error. court s judge order and We have reviewed the Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Justice v. White, No. 5:13-cv-00548-FL (E.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2014). motion for appointment of counsel. We We deny Justice s 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. DISMISSED 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.