Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Selby v. Holcomb, 04-6063 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-6063 Visitors: 28
Filed: Sep. 28, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6063 RICKY EMANUEL SELBY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BETH HOLCOMB, (Nurse) Health Service Administrator; M.D. ABDUL JAMALUDEEN; NURSE SCHULTZ; SHERIFF P. LANTEIGNE; CAPTAIN; NURSE PRINCE; NURSE BROOKS; NURSE FLETCHER; NURSE FIANO; NURSE ANDES; NURSE BRULET; LIEUTENANT RUSSELL; DEPUTY ULRICH; SERGEANT VARGAS; LIBRARIAN MAPES; LIEUTENANT LEE WILBURN; SERGEANT DRISCOLL; DEPUTY M. R. KEOGH; CORPORAL G. M. HILL, Defendants -
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6063 RICKY EMANUEL SELBY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BETH HOLCOMB, (Nurse) Health Service Administrator; M.D. ABDUL JAMALUDEEN; NURSE SCHULTZ; SHERIFF P. LANTEIGNE; CAPTAIN; NURSE PRINCE; NURSE BROOKS; NURSE FLETCHER; NURSE FIANO; NURSE ANDES; NURSE BRULET; LIEUTENANT RUSSELL; DEPUTY ULRICH; SERGEANT VARGAS; LIBRARIAN MAPES; LIEUTENANT LEE WILBURN; SERGEANT DRISCOLL; DEPUTY M. R. KEOGH; CORPORAL G. M. HILL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-520-2) Submitted: September 15, 2004 Decided: September 28, 2004 Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky Emanuel Selby, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ricky Emanuel Selby appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Selby v. Holcomb, No. CA-03-520-2 (E.D. Va. Dec. 16, 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