Curtis v. Saunders
Curtis v. Saunders
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7409
JAMES CURTIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
JAMES VENABLE; DONALD POWELL; PAUL HICKMAN; JOHN ALDRIDGE; MARK A. ADKINS; BOBBY WIDENER; TERRELL C. WADE,
Plaintiffs,
versus
L. M. SAUNDERS; V. GRANT, MRS.; DAY, Warden; L. M. HUFFMAN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-538-7)
Submitted: February 10, 2000 Decided: February 15, 2000
Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Curtis, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant Attor- ney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Curtis appeals the district court’s order granting De-
fendants’ motion for summary judgment and denying relief on his
42 U.S.C.A. § 1983(West Supp. 1999) 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. See Curtis v. Saunders, No. CA-98-538-7 (W.D. Va. Sept. 15,
1999). 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- Unpublished