Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Thomas v. Angelone, 03-6613 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-6613 Visitors: 15
Filed: Jun. 20, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6613 ROY ALLEN THOMAS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director; M. E. QUINONES, Doctor; NURSE GILBERT, R.N.; NURSE JUSTIN, L.P.N.; NURSE PHILLIPS, R.N.; DOCTOR THOMPSON, Wallens Ridge State Prison; DOCTOR JURGELSKY, Keen Mountain Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6613 ROY ALLEN THOMAS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director; M. E. QUINONES, Doctor; NURSE GILBERT, R.N.; NURSE JUSTIN, L.P.N.; NURSE PHILLIPS, R.N.; DOCTOR THOMPSON, Wallens Ridge State Prison; DOCTOR JURGELSKY, Keen Mountain Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-783-7) Submitted: June 12, 2003 Decided: June 20, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roy Allen Thomas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Leonard Taylor, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Jim Harold Guynn, Jr., Melvin Edward Williams, GUYNN & MEMMER, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Roy Allen Thomas, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Thomas v. Angelone, No. CA-01-783-7 (W.D. Va. Mar. 31, 2003). 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