Filed: Dec. 19, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7673 JOHN L. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FRED C. PFLANZ; A. HILLE, Judge; D. BARGER, Sheriff; B. SCUDDER, Deputy Prosecutor; ADAMS COUNTY; PAUL L. KIRKPATRICK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:12-mc-00012-LMB-TRJ) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 19, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, an
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7673 JOHN L. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FRED C. PFLANZ; A. HILLE, Judge; D. BARGER, Sheriff; B. SCUDDER, Deputy Prosecutor; ADAMS COUNTY; PAUL L. KIRKPATRICK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:12-mc-00012-LMB-TRJ) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 19, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7673 JOHN L. CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FRED C. PFLANZ; A. HILLE, Judge; D. BARGER, Sheriff; B. SCUDDER, Deputy Prosecutor; ADAMS COUNTY; PAUL L. KIRKPATRICK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:12-mc-00012-LMB-TRJ) Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 19, 2012 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John L. Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John L. Corrigan appeals the district court’s order denying his Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corrigan v. Pflanz, No. 1:12-mc-00012-LMB-TRJ (E.D. Va. Sept. 14, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
