Filed: Jun. 05, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6339 JOSEPH STILWELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CONCECO, Medical Contractor; DOCTOR WRAY; DOCTOR STERN, a/k/a F. C. Sturmer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-1094-AM) Submitted: May 8, 2001 Decided: June 5, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpub
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6339 JOSEPH STILWELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CONCECO, Medical Contractor; DOCTOR WRAY; DOCTOR STERN, a/k/a F. C. Sturmer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-1094-AM) Submitted: May 8, 2001 Decided: June 5, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubl..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6339 JOSEPH STILWELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CONCECO, Medical Contractor; DOCTOR WRAY; DOCTOR STERN, a/k/a F. C. Sturmer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-1094-AM) Submitted: May 8, 2001 Decided: June 5, 2001 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Stilwell, Appellant Pro Se. Frank Fletcher Rennie, IV, COWAN & OWEN, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Joseph Stilwell appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Appellees and dismissing his civil rights complaint alleging that the Appellees were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Stilwell v. Conceco, No. CA-99-1094-AM (E.D. Va. Feb. 16, 2001). 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 2