Filed: Mar. 15, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7406 ANTHONY MASON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JERRY DETRICK, Eastern Regional Jail Admin- istrator, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CA-97-64-3) Submitted: February 16, 1999 Decided: March 15, 1999 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7406 ANTHONY MASON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JERRY DETRICK, Eastern Regional Jail Admin- istrator, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CA-97-64-3) Submitted: February 16, 1999 Decided: March 15, 1999 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7406 ANTHONY MASON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JERRY DETRICK, Eastern Regional Jail Admin- istrator, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CA-97-64-3) Submitted: February 16, 1999 Decided: March 15, 1999 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Mason, Appellant Pro Se. Chad Mario Cardinal, Assistant Attorney General, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not bindig precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Anthony Mason appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) 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. See Mason v. Detrick, No. CA-97-64-3 (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 28, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
