Filed: Apr. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2762 PHILIP M. COOPER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. C. SPRADLIN, Officer; L. M. WETZEL, Offi- cer; VIRGINIA COCHRAN, Judge; W. S. HUMPHREY, Officer; CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; LONDON BRIDGE MOTOR COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-1106-2) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996 Be
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2762 PHILIP M. COOPER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. C. SPRADLIN, Officer; L. M. WETZEL, Offi- cer; VIRGINIA COCHRAN, Judge; W. S. HUMPHREY, Officer; CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; LONDON BRIDGE MOTOR COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-1106-2) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996 Bef..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-2762 PHILIP M. COOPER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. C. SPRADLIN, Officer; L. M. WETZEL, Offi- cer; VIRGINIA COCHRAN, Judge; W. S. HUMPHREY, Officer; CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; LONDON BRIDGE MOTOR COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-1106-2) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Philip M. Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Michael Golski, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Lee Melchor Turlington, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Jeff Wayne Rosen, ADLER, ROSEN & PETERS, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Cooper v. Spradlin, No. CA-94-1106-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 6, 1995; June 28, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3