Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

94-7187 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-7187 Visitors: 45
Filed: Feb. 16, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 48 F.3d 1216 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Elic L. GILLIAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GANES DICKENSON AUCTIONEERS/REAL ESTATE BROKERS; W. J. Hoover, Special Agent; Claude Sloan; E. Montgomery Tucker; Dye Ann Dickenson; Larry Ruley, Special Agent; Jerry W. Kilgore; Richard Ru
More

48 F.3d 1216
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Elic L. GILLIAM, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GANES DICKENSON AUCTIONEERS/REAL ESTATE BROKERS; W. J.
Hoover, Special Agent; Claude Sloan; E. Montgomery Tucker;
Dye Ann Dickenson; Larry Ruley, Special Agent; Jerry W.
Kilgore; Richard Russell; Betty Ann Gilliam; Harry
William Moore; Jack L. Berry, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-7187.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 19, 1995.
Decided Feb. 16, 1995.

Elic L. Gilliam, appellant pro se.

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint.* Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gilliam v. Ganes Dickenson Auctioneers, Nos. CA-94-699-R; CA-94-700-R; CA-94-701-R; CA-94-702-R; CA-94-703-R; CA-94-704-R; CA-94-705-R; CA-94-706-R; CA-94-707-R; CA-94-708-R; CA-94-709-R (W.D.Va. Sept. 2, 1994). 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

*

The claims against the federal officials named in Gilliam's Complaint were properly construed by the district court as actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

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