Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Reed v. Lafoon, 07-6650 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-6650 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 13, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6650 ODELL REED, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JULIA LAFOON, Nurse at Brunswick Correctional Center; she is sued in her individual and official capacity; ALVIN E. HARRIS, Doctor at Brunswick Correctional Center; he is sued in his individual and official capacity; K. RUNION, Warden at Brunswick Correctional Center; he is sued in his individual and official capacity; FRED SCHILLING, Health Service Director for Virginia D
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6650 ODELL REED, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JULIA LAFOON, Nurse at Brunswick Correctional Center; she is sued in her individual and official capacity; ALVIN E. HARRIS, Doctor at Brunswick Correctional Center; he is sued in his individual and official capacity; K. RUNION, Warden at Brunswick Correctional Center; he is sued in his individual and official capacity; FRED SCHILLING, Health Service Director for Virginia Department of Corrections; he is sued in his individual and official capacity; GENE M. JOHNSON, Director for the Virginia Department of Corrections; he is sued in his individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cv-00186-CMH) Submitted: October 31, 2007 Decided: November 13, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Odell Reed, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Odell Reed, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000), for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Reed v. Lafoon, No. 1:07-cv-00186-CMH (E.D. Va. filed Mar. 28, 2007 & entered Apr. 2, 2007). We deny Reed’s motion to submit new evidence and 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