Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Thurston v. Beskins, 04-1006 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1006 Visitors: 29
Filed: May 10, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1006 LEROY M. THURSTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HERBERT BESKINS; STEVE BENNETT; HELEN P. PARRISH, Defendants - Appellees, and BILL MOORE; JESSE FRANKLIN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-03-61) Submitted: March 8, 2004 Decided: May 10, 2004 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Aff
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1006 LEROY M. THURSTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HERBERT BESKINS; STEVE BENNETT; HELEN P. PARRISH, Defendants - Appellees, and BILL MOORE; JESSE FRANKLIN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-03-61) Submitted: March 8, 2004 Decided: May 10, 2004 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leroy M. Thurston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Linda Davis Frith, FRITH, ANDERSON & PEAKE, Roanoke, Virginia; James Morton Bowling, IV, ST. JOHN, BOWLING & LAWRENCE, Charlottesville, Virginia; Kevin Robert Huennekens, MALONEY, HUENNEKENS, PARKS, GECKER & PARSONS, Richmond, Virginia; Peter John Barrett, KUTAK ROCK, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Leroy M. Thurston, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Thurston’s motion for counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Thurston v. Beskins, No. CA-03-61 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2003). 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 - 3 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer