Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

94-7049 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-7049 Visitors: 38
Filed: Mar. 09, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 48 F.3d 1217 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Pervez A. QURESHI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn V. RICKARDS, individually and in her official capacity as Warden; Doctor Asad, individually and in his official capacity as Chief Medical Officer; D. R. Holliday, individually and
More

48 F.3d 1217
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Pervez A. QURESHI, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Carolyn V. RICKARDS, individually and in her official
capacity as Warden; Doctor Asad, individually and in his
official capacity as Chief Medical Officer; D. R. Holliday,
individually and in his official capacities as Physicians
Assistant and Assistant Hospital Administrator; Fred
Mumford, individually and in his official capacities as
Physicians Assistant and Assistant Hospital Administrator;
Three Unknown Physicians Assistants, individually and in
their official capacities as Physicians Assistants; Mr.
Moody, individually and in his official capacity as Safety
Officer; William McBride, individually and in his official
capacity as CCX Lieutenant, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-7049.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 16, 1995.
Decided March 9, 1995.

Pervez A. Qureshi, appellant pro se.

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

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his Bivens complaint.* 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. Qureshi v. Rickards, No. CA-94-847 (E.D. Va. August 26, 1994). 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

*

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

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