Case Name: Michael BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Jane Bailey; Billy Bailey, Plaintiffs, v. D.H. KENNEDY; D.B. Whitley; Mike Crisp; City of Hickory, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-04
Citations: 120 F. App'x 501
Docket Number: No. 04-2053
Parties: Michael BAILEY, Plaintiff—Appellant, and Jane Bailey; Billy Bailey, Plaintiffs, v. D.H. KENNEDY; D.B. Whitley; Mike Crisp; City of Hickory, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 120
Pages: 501–501

Head Matter:
Michael BAILEY, Plaintiff—Appellant, and Jane Bailey; Billy Bailey, Plaintiffs, v. D.H. KENNEDY; D.B. Whitley; Mike Crisp; City of Hickory, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 04-2053.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 30, 2004.
Decided: Feb. 4, 2005.
Michael Bailey, Appellant pro se.
James Redfern Morgan, Jr., Robert Danny Mason, Jr., Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Larry Wayne Johnson, City of Hickory, Hickory, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Michael Bailey appeals the district court's orders ruling on various motions for summary judgment, entering judgment for defendants in accordance with a jury verdict, and denying his motion for a new trial. Having reviewed the record and the issues raised on appeal, we find that the appeal is without merit and affirm. See Bailey v. Kennedy, No. CA-00-8-5-H (W.D.N.C. June 10, 2002; May 11, 2004; July 16, 2004). We grant the motions to file amended briefs. The motions for oral argument, to strike the memorandum and order, for preparation of a transcript at government expense, to depose Teresa Huffman, to strike a blood alcohol test, and to stay the case are denied. 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