Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Legg v. Gee, 00-6151 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6151 Visitors: 11
Filed: May 18, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6151 WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ARCHIE GEE, Warden; ASSISTANT WARDEN SPANGLER; FERNINAND MASSARI, Doctor; KRIPPA KASHYAP, Doctor; RICHARD CRAIG, Doctor; ROY SWANSON, Lieutenant; HILLARY JOHNSON, Sergeant; ALL LISTED DEFENDANTS IN ORIGINAL SUIT 1998; ALL NEW OR FOUND OUT DEFENDANTS IN THIS SUIT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenb
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6151 WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ARCHIE GEE, Warden; ASSISTANT WARDEN SPANGLER; FERNINAND MASSARI, Doctor; KRIPPA KASHYAP, Doctor; RICHARD CRAIG, Doctor; ROY SWANSON, Lieutenant; HILLARY JOHNSON, Sergeant; ALL LISTED DEFENDANTS IN ORIGINAL SUIT 1998; ALL NEW OR FOUND OUT DEFENDANTS IN THIS SUIT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 99-3860-DKC) Submitted: May 11, 2000 Decided: May 18, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Allen Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Allen Legg, a Maryland inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e) (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Legg v. Gee, No. CA- 99-3860-DKC (D. Md. Jan. 12, 2000). 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. DISMISSED 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