Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Sizemore v. Hun, 98-7415 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-7415 Visitors: 11
Filed: Dec. 03, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7415 RAY DERWOOD SIZEMORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NICHOLAS J. HUN, West Virginia Division of Corrections; WILLIAM C. DUNCIL, Warden, Hut- tonsville Correctional Center; J. N. LILLER, Warden, Pruntytown Correctional Center; ROY WHITE, Medical Director, Huttonsville Correc- tional Center; GENE HARLOW, M.D., Pruntytown Correctional Center; EARNEST HART, M.D., Hut- tonsville Correctional Center; MOOSA KISMET, M.D., Hutto
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7415 RAY DERWOOD SIZEMORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NICHOLAS J. HUN, West Virginia Division of Corrections; WILLIAM C. DUNCIL, Warden, Hut- tonsville Correctional Center; J. N. LILLER, Warden, Pruntytown Correctional Center; ROY WHITE, Medical Director, Huttonsville Correc- tional Center; GENE HARLOW, M.D., Pruntytown Correctional Center; EARNEST HART, M.D., Hut- tonsville Correctional Center; MOOSA KISMET, M.D., Huttonsville Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-6-2) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 3, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ray Derwood Sizemore, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie K. Kiser, WEST VIR- GINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Charleston, West Virginia; Mark Sheridan Brennan, WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER & TATUM, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have re- viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Sizemore v. Hun, No. CA-97-6-2 (N.D.W. Va. Sept. 4, 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
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