Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Reynolds v. Warner, 05-1826 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1826 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 28, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1826 ROBERT S. REYNOLDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARK WARNER, Honorable, Governor of Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendant - Appellee, and MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA, Auxiliary of Virginia Commonwealth University Health System; RETREAT HOSPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-05-349) Submitted
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1826 ROBERT S. REYNOLDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARK WARNER, Honorable, Governor of Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendant - Appellee, and MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA, Auxiliary of Virginia Commonwealth University Health System; RETREAT HOSPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-05-349) Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: February 28, 2006 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert S. Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Hall, Judith Williams Jagdmann, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert S. Reynolds 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 deny Reynolds’ motion for an en banc hearing and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Reynolds v. Warner, No. CA-05-349 (E.D. Va. June 23, 2005). 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