Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rawley Patton v. Charles C. Vardell, F.M. Mike Spearman, William T. Smith, Judge, John Doudoukjian, Deputy, Leroy Gadsen, Deputy, 90-3052 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-3052 Visitors: 34
Filed: Dec. 13, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 920 F.2d 927 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Rawley PATTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles C. VARDELL, F.M. Mike Spearman, William T. Smith, Judge, John Doudoukjian, Deputy, Leroy Gadsen, Deputy, Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-3052. United States Court
More

920 F.2d 927
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Rawley PATTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Charles C. VARDELL, F.M. Mike Spearman, William T. Smith,
Judge, John Doudoukjian, Deputy, Leroy Gadsen,
Deputy, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-3052.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 6, 1990.
Decided Dec. 13, 1990.

On Petition for Rehearing.

Rawley Patton, appellant pro se.

Vinton DeVane Lide, Lide, Potts & Montgomery, Columbia, S.C., for appellees.

AFFIRMED.

Before SPROUSE and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Rawley Patton appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Patton v. Vardell, CA-89-2280-3-6B (D.S.C. Mar. 1, 1990). 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