Filed: Jul. 09, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6633 MARK RANDAL MURRELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HONORABLE CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, in his official capacity as the Governor of the State of West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-18-2) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judge
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6633 MARK RANDAL MURRELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HONORABLE CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, in his official capacity as the Governor of the State of West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-18-2) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6633 MARK RANDAL MURRELL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HONORABLE CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, in his official capacity as the Governor of the State of West Virginia, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-18-2) Submitted: June 18, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Randal Murrell, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mark Randal Murrell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) 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. Murrell v. Underwood, No. CA-98-18-2 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 7, 1998). 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
