Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Julius Pittman v. John B. Metzger, Iii, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board, 68 F.3d 461, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Julius Pittman filed a Section 1983 complaint against the chairman of the Virginia Parole Board which was denied by the district court. This case was placed on hold pending the decision in a related case, Hill v. Jackson. Upon review, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's ruling, referencing the reasoning in Hill v. Jackson. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-10-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 68 F.3d 461 Docket: 95-6010

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Julius Pittman filed a Section 1983 complaint against the chairman of the Virginia Parole Board which was denied by the district court. This case was placed on hold pending the decision in a related case, Hill v. Jackson. Upon review, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's ruling, referencing the reasoning in Hill v. Jackson. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Julius Pittman v. John B. Metzger, Iii, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board, 68 F.3d 461, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Julius Pittman filed a Section 1983 complaint against the chairman of the Virginia Parole Board which was denied by the district court. This case was placed on hold pending the decision in a related case, Hill v. Jackson. Upon review, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's ruling, referencing the reasoning in Hill v. Jackson. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    68 F.

    3d 461

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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.
    Julius PITTMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    John B. METZGER, III, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 95-6010.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: Oct. 12, 1995.
    Decided: Oct. 23, 1995.

    Julius Pittman, Appellant Pro Se.


    Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
    VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, 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 placed this case in abeyance pending this
    court's decision in Hill v. Jackson, No. 94-6056 (4th Cir. Sept. 6, 1995). We
    have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of Hill v. Jackson and the
    district court. Pittman v. Metzger, No. CA-94-738 (E.D.Va. Dec. 22, 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

    You might also like