Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Nathan v. Kessler, 95-7025 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7025 Visitors: 16
Filed: Apr. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7025 CARLO NATHAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RAY KESSLER, Medical Administrator, Office of Health Services; RONALD ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections; STEVE DANEL, MCV Hospital, Defendants - Appellees, and JOHN DOE, Doctor, MCV, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-93-990-2) Submitted: Ma
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7025 CARLO NATHAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RAY KESSLER, Medical Administrator, Office of Health Services; RONALD ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections; STEVE DANEL, MCV Hospital, Defendants - Appellees, and JOHN DOE, Doctor, MCV, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-93-990-2) 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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carlo Nathan, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jill Theresa Bowers, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Nathan v. Kessler, No. CA-93-990-2 (E.D. Va. June 1 & 16, 1995). 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 2
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