Filed: Jun. 04, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7810 JAMES HENRY TINSLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DOCTOR HARRIS, Attending Physician, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:05-cv-00730-JBF) Submitted: May 16, 2007 Decided: June 4, 2007 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7810 JAMES HENRY TINSLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DOCTOR HARRIS, Attending Physician, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:05-cv-00730-JBF) Submitted: May 16, 2007 Decided: June 4, 2007 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7810 JAMES HENRY TINSLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DOCTOR HARRIS, Attending Physician, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:05-cv-00730-JBF) Submitted: May 16, 2007 Decided: June 4, 2007 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Henry Tinsley, Appellant Pro Se. Jeff Wayne Rosen, Lisa Ehrich, PENDER & COWARD, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Henry Tinsley 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 Tinsley v. Harris, No. 2:05-cv-00730-JBF (E.D. Va. Oct. 11, 2006). 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 -
