Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Ruthers v. Lowery, 98-1474 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-1474 Visitors: 22
Filed: Sep. 23, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1474 THOMAS G. RUTHERS, II, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HENRY LOWERY, Interstate Agreement Adminis- trator; THE WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-679-2) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 23, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1474 THOMAS G. RUTHERS, II, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HENRY LOWERY, Interstate Agreement Adminis- trator; THE WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-679-2) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 23, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas G. Ruthers, II, Appellant Pro Se. Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia; Leslie K. Kiser, WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order partially denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ruthers v. Lowery, No. CA-97-679-2 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 24, 1998). 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 2
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