Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Whisenant v. Waters, 95-7647 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7647 Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 15, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7647 STEVEN C. WHISENANT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GARY WATERS, Sheriff, Portsmouth City Jail; MAJOR SPURIOR, Classifications, Portsmouth City Jail; CAPTAIN NORRIS, Classifications, Portsmouth City Jail; LIEUTENANT BANKS, Clas- sifications, Portsmouth City Jail; SERGEANT PEEBLES, Sergeant of Security, Portsmouth City Jail; CITY OF PORTSMOUTH; J. R. SHARPE, Major; JOE SMITH; M. B. LEDOYEN, Lieutenant; CAPTAIN BULLOCK, D
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7647 STEVEN C. WHISENANT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GARY WATERS, Sheriff, Portsmouth City Jail; MAJOR SPURIOR, Classifications, Portsmouth City Jail; CAPTAIN NORRIS, Classifications, Portsmouth City Jail; LIEUTENANT BANKS, Clas- sifications, Portsmouth City Jail; SERGEANT PEEBLES, Sergeant of Security, Portsmouth City Jail; CITY OF PORTSMOUTH; J. R. SHARPE, Major; JOE SMITH; M. B. LEDOYEN, Lieutenant; CAPTAIN BULLOCK, Defendants - Appellees, and LIEUTENANT PORTSMOUTH CITY JAIL; JOHN DOE, Deputy/Officer, Portsmouth City Jail, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-94-161-2) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 15, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. 2 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven Whisenant, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Moss Levy, Mark Douglas Stiles, Kevin Lawson Keller, WILLCOX & SAVAGE, Norfolk, Virginia; Stuart E. Katz, Nancy Bennett Cherry, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Portsmouth, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. Whisenant v. Waters, No. CA-94-161-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 19, 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 3
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