Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Keaton Sutton v. Northern Neck Regional Jail, 14-6801 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-6801 Visitors: 31
Filed: Sep. 03, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6801 KEATON D. SUTTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL, Entire Medical Staff; NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL, Superintendent; NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL, Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00504-LO-JFA) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 3, 2014 Befo
More
                               UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                               No. 14-6801


KEATON D. SUTTON,

                Plaintiff - Appellant,

          v.

NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL, Entire Medical Staff; NORTHERN
NECK REGIONAL JAIL, Superintendent; NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL
JAIL, Medical Department,

                Defendants - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.   Liam O’Grady, District
Judge. (1:14-cv-00504-LO-JFA)


Submitted:   August 28, 2014                 Decided:   September 3, 2014


Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Keaton D. Sutton, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

          Keaton D. Sutton appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b)(1) (2012), for failure to state a claim.       We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error.   Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.     Sutton

v. N. Neck Reg’l Jail, No. 1:14-cv-00504-LO-JFA (E.D. Va. filed

May 9, 2014; entered May 13, 2014).      We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before this 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