Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief on Elic Gilliam's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various auctioneers, real estate brokers, and law enforcement agents. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit after reviewing the record and district court opinion. The district court had previously denied relief on September 2, 1994, finding Gilliam's claims against federal officials were properly construed as actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-02-16 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 48 F.3d 1216 Docket: 94-7187

    Original Title

    Elic L. Gilliam v. Ganes Dickenson Auctioneers/real Estate Brokers W. J. Hoover, Special Agent Claude Sloan E. Montgomery Tucker Dye Ann Dickenson Larry Ruley, Special Agent Jerry W. Kilgore Richard Russell Betty Ann Gilliam Harry William Moore Jack L. Berry, 48 F.3d 1216, 4th Cir. (1995)

    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 affirmed the district court's denial of relief on Elic Gilliam's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various auctioneers, real estate brokers, and law enforcement agents. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit after reviewing the record and district court opinion. The district court had previously denied relief on September 2, 1994, finding Gilliam's claims against federal officials were properly construed as actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief on Elic Gilliam's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various auctioneers, real estate brokers, and law enforcement agents. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit after reviewing the record and district court opinion. The district court had previously denied relief on September 2, 1994, finding Gilliam's claims against federal officials were properly construed as actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

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

    48 F.

    3d 1216
    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.

    Elic L. GILLIAM, Plaintiff-Appellant,


    v.
    GANES DICKENSON AUCTIONEERS/REAL ESTATE
    BROKERS; W. J.
    Hoover, Special Agent; Claude Sloan; E. Montgomery Tucker;
    Dye Ann Dickenson; Larry Ruley, Special Agent; Jerry W.
    Kilgore; Richard Russell; Betty Ann Gilliam; Harry
    William Moore; Jack L. Berry, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 94-7187.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Jan. 19, 1995.
    Decided Feb. 16, 1995.

    Elic L. Gilliam, appellant pro se.


    Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint.* Our review of the record and the district court's
    opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on
    the reasoning of the district court. Gilliam v. Ganes Dickenson Auctioneers,
    Nos. CA-94-699-R; CA-94-700-R; CA-94-701-R; CA-94-702-R; CA-94-703R; CA-94-704-R; CA-94-705-R; CA-94-706-R; CA-94-707-R; CA-94-708-R;
    CA-94-709-R (W.D.Va. Sept. 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

    The claims against the federal officials named in Gilliam's Complaint were
    properly construed by the district court as actions under Bivens v. Six Unknown
    Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

    You might also like