Case ID: f-appx_465/html/0244-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Randell E. BUCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John K. GREENLEE, Individually and in his official capacity as Justice of the Superior Court of Gaston County; Paula Brinkley, Individually and in her official capacity as Social Worker for Gaston County Department of Social Services; Melanie J. Richards, Individually and in her official capacity as MSW, Program Supervisor, Office of the Guardian Ad Litem, Judicial District 27A; Pamela Davis, Individually and in her official capacity as Guardian Ad Litem, Judicial District 27A; Keith Moon, Individually and in his official capacity as Director, Gaston County Department of Social Services; Robert Becker, Individually and in his official capacity as Chairman of the Board, Gaston County Department of Social Services; Sherry S. Bradsher, Individually and in her official capacity as Director NC Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 11-2189.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Feb. 9, 2012.
    Decided: Feb. 13, 2012.
    Randell E. Buck, Appellant Pro Se. Grady L. Balentine, Jr., Gerald Kevin Robbins, Special Deputy Attorneys General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Martha Raymond Thompson, Stott, Hollowell, Palmer & Windham, Gastonia, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Randell E. Buck appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Buck v. Greenlee, No. 3:10-cv00540-RJC-DSC, 2011 WL 4595262 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 30, 2011). 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.