Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

95-7916 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7916 Visitors: 6
Filed: Apr. 29, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 85 F.3d 616 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Calvin G. GRAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles R. SMITH, Individually and in his personal capacity as a private citizen and in his official capacity as a Prosecutor of Mercer County, West Virginia, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-
More

85 F.3d 616

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Calvin G. GRAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Charles R. SMITH, Individually and in his personal capacity
as a private citizen and in his official capacity
as a Prosecutor of Mercer County, West
Virginia, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-7916.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 15, 1996.
Decided April 29, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-95-862-1)

Calvin G. Gray, Appellant Pro Se.

S.D.W.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1988). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gray v. Smith, No. CA-95-862-1 (S.D.W.Va. Oct. 23, 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.

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