Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Davis v. Stanford, 04-7911 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-7911 Visitors: 18
Filed: May 10, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7911 ROBERT LEE DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus L. STANFORD, Medical Administrator; PAGE TRUE, Warden; K. EMRAN, Prison Doctor; PRISON HEALTHCARE SERVICES, Healthcare Provider; FRED SCHILLINGS, Director of Medical Services; CAPTAIN MILLER, Building Captain; J. LEWIS, Counselor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7911 ROBERT LEE DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus L. STANFORD, Medical Administrator; PAGE TRUE, Warden; K. EMRAN, Prison Doctor; PRISON HEALTHCARE SERVICES, Healthcare Provider; FRED SCHILLINGS, Director of Medical Services; CAPTAIN MILLER, Building Captain; J. LEWIS, Counselor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-1166-1) Submitted: April 25, 2005 Decided: May 10, 2005 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lee Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Noelle Leigh Shaw-Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Lee Davis 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. See Davis v. Stanford, No. CA-03-1166-1 (E.D. Va. Oct. 26, 2004). We also deny Davis’ motion for summary reversal. 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