Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hitt v. Mapp, 95-7290 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7290 Visitors: 31
Filed: Feb. 01, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7290 DANIEL TRUMAN HITT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SHERIFF MAPP, Defendant - Appellee, and POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER; DR. BARNES, Chief Physician, Powhatan Correctional Center; NORFOLK CITY JAIL, Sheriff; DONALD R. GUILLORY, Warden, Powhatan Correctional Cen- ter; B. DONATI, Powhatan Correctional Center, Nursing Staff; J. BROWN, Powhatan Correctional Center Nursing Staff; A. JOHNSON, Powhatan Correctional Center Nurs
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7290 DANIEL TRUMAN HITT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SHERIFF MAPP, Defendant - Appellee, and POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER; DR. BARNES, Chief Physician, Powhatan Correctional Center; NORFOLK CITY JAIL, Sheriff; DONALD R. GUILLORY, Warden, Powhatan Correctional Cen- ter; B. DONATI, Powhatan Correctional Center, Nursing Staff; J. BROWN, Powhatan Correctional Center Nursing Staff; A. JOHNSON, Powhatan Correctional Center Nursing Staff, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-806) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Truman Hitt, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. Hitt v. Mapp, No. CA-94-806 (E.D. Va. Aug. 1, 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