Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views1 page
    Michael Steven Sayko filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint that was denied by the district court. Sayko appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion denying relief. The Fourth Circuit found the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials, so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-09-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 97 F.3d 1448 Docket: 96-6824

    Original Title

    Michael Steven Sayko v. Richard A. Lanham, Sr. J. Joseph Curran, Jr. Alan D. Eason Marlene Lougar J. Hemler Kathy Grant Stace Donohoo, 97 F.3d 1448, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Michael Steven Sayko filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint that was denied by the district court. Sayko appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion denying relief. The Fourth Circuit found the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials, so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views1 page

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Michael Steven Sayko filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint that was denied by the district court. Sayko appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion denying relief. The Fourth Circuit found the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials, so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    97 F.

    3d 1448

    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.
    Michael Steven SAYKO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Richard A. LANHAM, Sr.; J. Joseph Curran, Jr.; Alan D.
    Eason; Marlene Lougar; J. Hemler; Kathy Grant;
    Stace Donohoo, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 96-6824.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Aug. 22, 1996.
    Decided Sept. 5, 1996.

    Michael Steven Sayko, Appellant Pro Se.


    Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    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. Sayko v. Lanham, No. CA-96-1055-AW (D.Md. Apr. 17,
    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

    You might also like