Filed: Aug. 02, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7817 HARRY RICHARD HAMMAR, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. ERMAN, Doctor; MS. BANKS, Nurse; MS. READ, Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-04-631-AM) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 2, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7817 HARRY RICHARD HAMMAR, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. ERMAN, Doctor; MS. BANKS, Nurse; MS. READ, Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-04-631-AM) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 2, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7817
HARRY RICHARD HAMMAR, III,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MR. ERMAN, Doctor; MS. BANKS, Nurse; MS. READ,
Nurse,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (CA-04-631-AM)
Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 2, 2005
Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harry Richard Hammar, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Harry Richard Hammar, III, appeals from the district
court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000)
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2000). We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion, and we find that
Hammar failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted.
See Estelle v. Gamble,
429 U.S. 97 (1976). Accordingly, we affirm
the dismissal of his complaint. 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 -