Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Mills v. MD Penitentiary Hosp, 97-6343 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6343 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 17, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6343 ALBERT CURTIS MILLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND PENITENTIARY HOSPITAL DENTISTS; NATHAN FLETCHER, D.D.S., Maryland Penitentiary Dentist, Defendants - Appellees. No. 97-6781 ALBERT CURTIS MILLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND PENITENTIARY HOSPITAL DENTISTS; NATHAN FLETCHER, D.D.S., Maryland Penitentiary Dentist, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6343 ALBERT CURTIS MILLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND PENITENTIARY HOSPITAL DENTISTS; NATHAN FLETCHER, D.D.S., Maryland Penitentiary Dentist, Defendants - Appellees. No. 97-6781 ALBERT CURTIS MILLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND PENITENTIARY HOSPITAL DENTISTS; NATHAN FLETCHER, D.D.S., Maryland Penitentiary Dentist, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 96-1277-DKC) Submitted: May 29, 1998 Decided: July 16, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Curtis Mills, Appellant Pro Se. Roy Leonard Mason, MASON, KETTERMAN & MORGAN, Baltimore, Maryland; Deborah Maude Peyton, MASON, KETTERMAN & MORGAN, Hunt Valley, Maryland, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. § 1983 (1994) complaint and denying his motion for injunctive relief. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Mills v. Maryland Penitentiary Hosp. Dentists, No. CA-96-1277-DKC (D. Md. Jan. 31 & May 8, 1997). We deny Appellant’s motion for a tran- script. 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