Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Sa'id v. City of Alexandria, 99-1813 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-1813 Visitors: 1
Filed: Sep. 21, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1813 MUSTAFA H. SA’ID, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF ALEXANDRIA; KERRY J. DONLEY; ROSE WILLIAMS BOYDE; REDELLA S. PERPER; WILLIAM C. CLEVELAND; WILLIAM D. EUILLE; LONNIE C. RICH; DAVID SPEEK; LOIS LAWSON; THE CITY OF ALEX- ANDRIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHARLES E. SAMARA, Police Chief, individually; POLICE OFFICER PORTEL; POLICE OFFICER CONNIFF; JOHN DOE, #1, Police Officer; MARY DOE, Police Officer; JOHN DOE, Defendants
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1813 MUSTAFA H. SA’ID, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF ALEXANDRIA; KERRY J. DONLEY; ROSE WILLIAMS BOYDE; REDELLA S. PERPER; WILLIAM C. CLEVELAND; WILLIAM D. EUILLE; LONNIE C. RICH; DAVID SPEEK; LOIS LAWSON; THE CITY OF ALEX- ANDRIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHARLES E. SAMARA, Police Chief, individually; POLICE OFFICER PORTEL; POLICE OFFICER CONNIFF; JOHN DOE, #1, Police Officer; MARY DOE, Police Officer; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-563-A) Submitted: August 31, 1999 Decided: September 21, 1999 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mustafa H. Sa’id, Appellant Pro Se. George Arthur McAndrews, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mustafa H. Sa’id appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Sa’id v. City of Alexandria, No. CA-99-563-A (E.D. Va. June 11, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials 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