Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Kenny v. Commonwealth of VA, 97-7530 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7530 Visitors: 22
Filed: Mar. 04, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7530 EMRICH C. KENNY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; PAUL BASS, Acting Warden; A. M. PARKER, Major; CRISSY CREATH, LPN; FELECIA FLEMING, LPN; JOHN DOE HYMAN, LPN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-97-30-3) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: March
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7530 EMRICH C. KENNY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; PAUL BASS, Acting Warden; A. M. PARKER, Major; CRISSY CREATH, LPN; FELECIA FLEMING, LPN; JOHN DOE HYMAN, LPN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-97-30-3) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: March 4, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emrich C. Kenny, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Kenny v. Virginia, No. CA-97-30-3 (E.D. Va. Sept. 29, 1997). We deny Ap- pellant's motion to appoint counsel. 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. DISMISSED 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