976 F.2d 725
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Frank Ervin ALTIZER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Thomas SCOTT, Individually and as Correctional Officer;
Unknown Defendants, Persons, who, in their individual
capacity, while purporting to exercise color of authority of
state law have participated in the acts complained of herein
and the complete extent of their participation and/or
knowledge of their identity is not currently known to
plaintiff and, of which, in either whole or part, shared in
the responsibility for committing the acts redressed herein
and/or shared in the clearly established constitutional
responsibility for preventing the acts redressed herein and
either intentionally failed or recklessly refused to prevent
the illegal, unlawful, and/or unconstitutional wrongs
redressed herein and, of which, further, in either whole or
part, have entered into a common scheme or plan among
themselves and/or others unknown to abuse color of authority
of state law to inflict upon plaintiff the illegal,
unlawful, and/or unconstitutional acts, practices, and/or
procedures violative of, repugnant to and/or inconsistent
with the clearly established rights, privileges, and/or
immunities secured to plaintiff by the Constitution of the
United States, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 92-6617.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 31, 1992
Decided: September 18, 1992
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-91-145)
Frank Ervin Altizer, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
William Rundahl Coleman, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
E.D.Va.
Affirmed.
Before SPROUSE and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Frank Altizer appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Altizer v. Scott, No. CA-91-145 (E.D. Va. May 12, 1992). 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
