Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Bane v. Pearson, 04-6769 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-6769 Visitors: 3
Filed: Nov. 16, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6769 ROBERT ALLEN BANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDDIE LEE PEARSON, Warden; LIEUTENANT HAMLETTE, Supervisor, Housing Unit 4; H. JOHNSON, Major, Chief of Security; VERNON SMITH, Doctor, Director of Health Services; MS. ELLIS, Medical Supervisor; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; SUSSEX II STATE PRISON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexand
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6769 ROBERT ALLEN BANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDDIE LEE PEARSON, Warden; LIEUTENANT HAMLETTE, Supervisor, Housing Unit 4; H. JOHNSON, Major, Chief of Security; VERNON SMITH, Doctor, Director of Health Services; MS. ELLIS, Medical Supervisor; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; SUSSEX II STATE PRISON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-295-1-AM) Submitted: October 27, 2004 Decided: November 16, 2004 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Allen Bane, Appellant Pro Se. Edward Joseph McNelis, III, Coreen Antoinette Bromfield, RAWLS & MCNELIS, P.C., Richmond, Virginia; Philip Carlton Hollowell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Allen Bane 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 Bane v. Pearson, No. CA-03-295-1-AM (E.D. Va. Mar. 11, 2004). We grant Bane’s unopposed motion to dismiss Ellis as a party to this appeal. 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