Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Linwood Earl Chandler v. Samuel L. Batts J. Hite, Correctional Officer T.E. Rooks, Sergeant M.D. Hines, Sergeant, 57 F.3d 1065, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Linwood Earl Chandler on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court also denied Chandler's emergency motion for injunctive relief to transfer prisons and his motion for the case to be reconsidered with appointed counsel.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-06-19 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 57 F.3d 1065 Docket: 95-6080

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Linwood Earl Chandler on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court also denied Chandler's emergency motion for injunctive relief to transfer prisons and his motion for the case to be reconsidered with appointed counsel.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    Linwood Earl Chandler v. Samuel L. Batts J. Hite, Correctional Officer T.E. Rooks, Sergeant M.D. Hines, Sergeant, 57 F.3d 1065, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Linwood Earl Chandler on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court also denied Chandler's emergency motion for injunctive relief to transfer prisons and his motion for the case to be reconsidered with appointed counsel.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    57 F.

    3d 1065
    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished
    dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law
    of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the
    Fourth Circuit.

    Linwood Earl CHANDLER, Plaintiff-Appellant,


    v.
    Samuel L. BATTS; J. Hite, Correctional Officer; T.E.
    Rooks, Sergeant; M.D. Hines, Sergeant,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 95-6080.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: April 20, 1995.
    Decided: June 19, 1995.

    Linwood Earl Chandler, Appellant Pro Se.


    E.D.Va.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) 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. Chandler v. Batts, No. CA-94-1224-AM (E.D.
    Va. Dec. 2, 1994). 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.

    We deny Appellant's "Emergency Motion for Immediate Injunctive Relief" in


    which he requests that we place the case in abeyance and transfer him to
    another prison. We also deny Appellant's "Motion to Reconvene and for the
    appointment of counsel."

    You might also like