Gransby v. Swisher

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Gransby v. Swisher

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7372

JAMES GRANSBY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

D. SWISHER; R. L. LUCAS; L. M. SAUNDERS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-95-1034-R)

Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 6, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Gransby, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Ralph Davis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his

42 U.S.C. § 1983

(1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

Gransby v. Swisher, No. CA-95-1034-R (W.D. Va. July 29, 1996). 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

Reference

Status
Unpublished