Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Webster v. Adams, 04-6911 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-6911 Visitors: 22
Filed: Aug. 20, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6911 SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-690-1) Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 20, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvi
More
                               UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                               No. 04-6911



SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER,

                                                Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus


VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp,

                                                 Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief
District Judge. (CA-03-690-1)


Submitted:   August 12, 2004                 Decided:   August 20, 2004


Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Sylvia Ryan Webster, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

          Sylvia Ryan Webster appeals the district court’s order

accepting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing her complaint filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and

also considered under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the

Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 
403 U.S. 388
 (1971).    We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error.    Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court.      See Webster v.

Adams, No. CA-03-690-1 (S.D.W. Va. filed May 13, 2004 & entered

May 14, 2004).   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 -

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