Filed: Jul. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1336 PATRICK CHRISTIAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM H. DADMUN, Records & Receipts Manager; VICKI BRIDGEMAN, Unclaimed Property Manager; MANJU GANERIWALA, Virginia Treasurer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:18-cv-00489-MHL) Submitted: July 18, 2019 Decided: July 22, 2019 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, an
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1336 PATRICK CHRISTIAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM H. DADMUN, Records & Receipts Manager; VICKI BRIDGEMAN, Unclaimed Property Manager; MANJU GANERIWALA, Virginia Treasurer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:18-cv-00489-MHL) Submitted: July 18, 2019 Decided: July 22, 2019 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-1336
PATRICK CHRISTIAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WILLIAM H. DADMUN, Records & Receipts Manager; VICKI BRIDGEMAN,
Unclaimed Property Manager; MANJU GANERIWALA, Virginia Treasurer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:18-cv-00489-MHL)
Submitted: July 18, 2019 Decided: July 22, 2019
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patrick O. Christian, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Patrick O. Christian appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Christian v.
Dadmun, No. 3:18-cv-00489-MHL (E.D. Va. Mar. 27, 2019). 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