Filed: Apr. 13, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7873 MICHAEL A. WEBB, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDDIE PEARSON, Warden; MR. POLITE, Correction Officer; HAMLLET, Lieutenant; MR. NICKELS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:04-cv-00815-LMB) Submitted: March 19, 2007 Decided: April 13, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affir
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7873 MICHAEL A. WEBB, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDDIE PEARSON, Warden; MR. POLITE, Correction Officer; HAMLLET, Lieutenant; MR. NICKELS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:04-cv-00815-LMB) Submitted: March 19, 2007 Decided: April 13, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirm..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7873 MICHAEL A. WEBB, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDDIE PEARSON, Warden; MR. POLITE, Correction Officer; HAMLLET, Lieutenant; MR. NICKELS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:04-cv-00815-LMB) Submitted: March 19, 2007 Decided: April 13, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael A. Webb, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael A. Webb appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as to defendants Pearson, Hamllet, and Nickels; awarding default judgment and $5000 damages against defendant Polite; and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm all orders for the reasons stated by the district court. Webb v. Pearson, No. 1:04- cv-00815-LMB (E.D. Va. Nov. 17, 2004; Aug. 23, 2006; and Oct. 17, 2006). We also deny Webb’s motion for summary judgment filed in this court. 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 -