Filed: Oct. 08, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6464 BRYAN HOLGATE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA A. EDGE, Warden, St. Brides Correc- tional Center; DOCTOR HERBERT; MS. COCHRAN, R.N., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-608) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 8, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6464 BRYAN HOLGATE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA A. EDGE, Warden, St. Brides Correc- tional Center; DOCTOR HERBERT; MS. COCHRAN, R.N., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-608) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 8, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed b..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6464 BRYAN HOLGATE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA A. EDGE, Warden, St. Brides Correc- tional Center; DOCTOR HERBERT; MS. COCHRAN, R.N., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-608) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 8, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bryan Holgate, Appellant Pro Se. Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) claims against Warden Patricia Edge, dis- missing without prejudice the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against Dr. Herbert and Ms. Cochran, and dismissing without prejudice the remaining state claims. We have reviewed the record and the dis- trict court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Holgate v. Edge, No. CA-96-608 (E.D. Va. Mar. 17, 1997). 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 deci- sional process. AFFIRMED 2