Case ID: f-appx_205/html/0176-01.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

Michael H. McGEE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR; State of North Carolina; L. Thomas Lunsford, Secretary, NC State Bar; Dudley Humphrey, President of NC State Bar; David R. Johnson, Counsel for the NC State Bar; A. Root Edmonson, Counsel for the NC State Bar; Stephen E. Culbreth, NC Bar DHC; Joseph G. Maddrey, NC Bar DHC; Marguerite P. Watts, NC Bar DHC; Elizabeth Bunting, NC Bar DHC; R. Mitchell Tyler, NC Bar DHC; Calvin E. Murphy, Vice-President, NC State Bar, in their official and individual capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
    
      No. 05-1767.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 11, 2006.
    Decided: Nov. 13, 2006.
    Michael H. McGee, Appellant Pro Se. Carolin Delancey Bakewell, Thomas Frederick Moffitt, North Carolina State Bar, Raleigh, North Carolina; William Norris Farrell, Jr., Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Grady L. Balentine, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Michael H. McGee appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McGee v. North Carolina State Bar, No. CA-04-860-5-1FL (E.D.N.C. June 1, 2005). We deny as moot McGee’s motions to expedite and for relief from stay and 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.