Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Dalton v. WV Division of Corrections, 09-7693 (2010)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 09-7693 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jan. 27, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7693 1STARR DALTON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS; DAVID BALLARD, Warden; JIM RUBENSTEIN; BRIAN GREENWOOD; ADAM CAYTON, Correctional Officer II; NATE KENDRICK, Corporal; CURTIS DIXON, Sergeant, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:08-cv-01153) Submitted: Jan
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7693 1STARR DALTON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS; DAVID BALLARD, Warden; JIM RUBENSTEIN; BRIAN GREENWOOD; ADAM CAYTON, Correctional Officer II; NATE KENDRICK, Corporal; CURTIS DIXON, Sergeant, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:08-cv-01153) Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 27, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. 1Starr Dalton, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher James Sears, SHUMAN, MCCUSKEY & SLICER, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: 1Starr Dalton appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we modify the dismissal of the action to be without prejudice and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Dalton v. W. Va. Div. of Corr., No. 2:08-cv-01153 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 25, 2009). 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 AS MODIFIED 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