Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Diedrich v. City of Newport News, 04-1603 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-1603 Visitors: 51
Filed: Sep. 14, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1603 JASON L. DIEDRICH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA; EDGAR E. MARONEY, individually and as City Manager of the City of Newport News; DENNIS A. MOOK, individually and as Chief of Police, Newport News Police Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-0
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1603 JASON L. DIEDRICH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA; EDGAR E. MARONEY, individually and as City Manager of the City of Newport News; DENNIS A. MOOK, individually and as Chief of Police, Newport News Police Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-04-9-4) Submitted: September 9, 2004 Decided: September 14, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason L. Diedrich, Appellant Pro Se. Allen Link Jackson, Deputy City Attorney, Newport News, Virginia; Stanley Graves Barr, Jr., Shepherd Dean Wainger, KAUFMAN & CANOLES, Norfolk, Virginia; for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Jason L. Diedrich 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Diedrich v. City of Newport News, No. CA-04-9-4 (E.D. Va. Apr. 26, 2004). Diedrich’s motion for a stay of the appeal is denied. 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 - 3 -
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