Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jerome Wallace v. Seaman, P.A., Valery Williams, Nurse, Dr. Turkman, Medical Department, Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center, 90-7109 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-7109 Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 26, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 917 F.2d 23 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jerome WALLACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEAMAN, P.A., Valery Williams, Nurse, Dr. Turkman, Medical Department, Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-7109. United State
More

917 F.2d 23
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jerome WALLACE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SEAMAN, P.A., Valery Williams, Nurse, Dr. Turkman, Medical
Department, Maryland Correctional Adjustment
Center, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-7109.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 1, 1990.
Decided Oct. 26, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-89-2904-WN)

Jerome Wallace, appellant pro se.

Gertrude Catherine Bartel, Kevin Francis Arthur, Kramon & Graham, P.A., Baltimore, Md., for appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Jerome Wallace 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. Wallace v. Seaman, CA-89-2904-WN (D.Md. July 28, 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