Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Barnes v. Huffman, 08-6115 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-6115 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 29, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6115 DENNIS LEE BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LARRY HUFFMAN; A. DAVID ROBINSON; RANDY FLEENOR; SERGEANT YOUNG; INVESTIGATOR STILL; P. SCARBERRY, Institutional Food Service Director at WRSP; A. SCHUPE; J. SALYER, Institutional recreational supervisor at WRSP; B.J. RAVIZEE, Institutional grievance coordinator at WRSP, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6115 DENNIS LEE BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LARRY HUFFMAN; A. DAVID ROBINSON; RANDY FLEENOR; SERGEANT YOUNG; INVESTIGATOR STILL; P. SCARBERRY, Institutional Food Service Director at WRSP; A. SCHUPE; J. SALYER, Institutional recreational supervisor at WRSP; B.J. RAVIZEE, Institutional grievance coordinator at WRSP, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:06-cv-00745-gec-mfu) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 29, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dennis Lee Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Bland Curwood, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dennis Lee Barnes 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. Barnes v. Huffman, No. 7:06-cv-00745-gec-mfu (W.D. Va. filed Nov. 6, 2007, entered Nov. 7, 2007; filed Dec. 3, 2007, entered Dec. 4, 2007). 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