Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lites v. Bass, 09-7060 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-7060 Visitors: 36
Filed: Oct. 26, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7060 MICHAEL LITES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GARY L. BASS, Chief of Operations Offender Management Services; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CULTER, Officer SA; Classification Officer; D. M. MILLER, Officer, Henrico County Police Officer; A. J. GORDON, Officer, Henrico Division of Police Officer; A. D. MARTIN, JR., Officer, Henrico Division of Police Officer; DENNIS MARTIN, Esquire, Attorney at Law; A. D. SMITH, Officer, Henric
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7060 MICHAEL LITES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GARY L. BASS, Chief of Operations Offender Management Services; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CULTER, Officer SA; Classification Officer; D. M. MILLER, Officer, Henrico County Police Officer; A. J. GORDON, Officer, Henrico Division of Police Officer; A. D. MARTIN, JR., Officer, Henrico Division of Police Officer; DENNIS MARTIN, Esquire, Attorney at Law; A. D. SMITH, Officer, Henrico County Police Officer; DORIS EWING, Manager of Court and Legal Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:09-cv-0453-AJT-JFA) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Lites, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Lites seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Lites v. Bass, No. 1:09-cv-0453-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. May 12, 2009). We also deny Lites’ motions to appoint counsel and for default judgment. 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