Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Frank Ervin Altizer, Jr. v. Lonnie M. Saunders Larry W. Huffman Swisher Santiago Captain Hardin Unknown, 95-7445 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7445 Visitors: 20
Filed: Dec. 15, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 72 F.3d 126 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Frank Ervin ALTIZER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lonnie M. SAUNDERS; Larry W. Huffman; Swisher; Santiago; Captain Hardin; Unknown Defendants, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-7445. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
More

72 F.3d 126
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Frank Ervin ALTIZER, Jr., Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Lonnie M. SAUNDERS; Larry W. Huffman; Swisher; Santiago;
Captain Hardin; Unknown Defendants, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-7445.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 21, 1995.
Decided Dec. 15, 1995.

Frank Ervin Altizer, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District Judge. (CA-92-413-R)

Before WIDENER and HALL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, 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. 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. Altizer v. Saunders, No. CA-92-413-R (W.D.Va. July 31, 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