Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Timothy Layton v. Eastern Regional Jail Jerry L. Detrick, Jail Administrator Billy B. Burk Edward J. Rudolph Correctional Officer Reed, 1, 95-6582 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6582 Visitors: 40
Filed: Aug. 11, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 64 F.3d 657 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Timothy LAYTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EASTERN REGIONAL JAIL; Jerry L. Detrick, Jail Administrator; Billy B. Burk; Edward J. Rudolph; Correctional Officer Reed, # 1, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-6582. United States Court of A
More

64 F.3d 657

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Timothy LAYTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
EASTERN REGIONAL JAIL; Jerry L. Detrick, Jail
Administrator; Billy B. Burk; Edward J. Rudolph;
Correctional Officer Reed, # 1,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-6582.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Aug. 11, 1995.
Submitted: July 25, 1995
Decided: August 11, 1995

Timothy Layton, Appellant Pro Se.

Chad Marlo Cardinal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jeffrey K. Matherly, Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., Office of the Atty. Gen. of West Virginia, Charleston, WV, for Appellees.

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Layton v. Eastern Regional Jail, No. CA-91-25-2 (N.D.W. Va. May 10, 1993; Apr. 7, 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

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