Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

90-7358 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-7358 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 05, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 927 F.2d 598 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Joe Louis WISE, v. Edward MURRAY, Director, VA Department of Corrections, Toni V. Bair, Reg. Admin. VA Department of Corrections, David Williams, Warden, Powhatan Correctional Center, Defendants-Appellees.
More

927 F.2d 598
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Joe Louis WISE,
v.
Edward MURRAY, Director, VA Department of Corrections, Toni
V. Bair, Reg. Admin. VA Department of Corrections,
David Williams, Warden, Powhatan
Correctional Center,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-7358.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 1990.
Decided March 5, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-88-1166-AM)

Joe Louis Wise, appellant pro se.

Richard Francis Gorman, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before K.K. HALL, PHILLIPS and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Joe Louis Wise appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Wise v. Murray, CA-88-1166-AM (E.D.Va. July 12, 1990). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

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