Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

William T. Holmes v. Clarence L. Jackson, Jr. Lewis W. Hurst John A. Brown Gail Y. Browne Jacqueline F. Fraser John B. Metzger, III, 95-6586 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6586 Visitors: 20
Filed: Jun. 29, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 60 F.3d 822 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. William T. HOLMES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Clarence L. JACKSON, Jr.; Lewis W. Hurst; John A. Brown; Gail Y. Browne; Jacqueline F. Fraser; John B. Metzger, III, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-6586. No. 95-6562 United States Court
More

60 F.3d 822
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William T. HOLMES, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Clarence L. JACKSON, Jr.; Lewis W. Hurst; John A. Brown;
Gail Y. Browne; Jacqueline F. Fraser; John B.
Metzger, III, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-6586.

No. 95-6562

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995
Decided June 29, 1995

William T. Holmes, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for appellees.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's* orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's orders, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Holmes v. Jackson, No. CA-94-529-R (E.D. Va. Mar. 15, 1995, Apr. 14, 1995). 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

*

Jurisdiction was appropriate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c) (1988)

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