Filed: Nov. 24, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7113 QUENTIN MCLEAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE; G. DEEDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CA-99-341-7) Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quentin McLean, Appellant Pro
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7113 QUENTIN MCLEAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE; G. DEEDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CA-99-341-7) Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quentin McLean, Appellant Pro ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7113
QUENTIN MCLEAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RON ANGELONE; G. DEEDS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge.
(CA-99-341-7)
Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999
Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Quentin McLean, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Quentin McLean appeals the district court's order dismissing
his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint for failure to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28
U.S.C.A. § 1915A(b)(1) (West 1999). 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
McLean v. Angelone, No. CA-99-341-7 (W.D. Va. July 27, 1999).* 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
*
Although the district court’s memorandum opinion and final
order are marked as “filed” July 26, 1999, the district court’s
records show that they were entered on the docket sheet on July 27,
1999. Pursuant to rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, it is the date that the memorandum and order were
entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of
the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray,
806 F.2d
1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2