Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Anderson v. Phillips, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Maurice Anderson in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against medical providers at a Virginia jail. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the three-judge panel found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-04-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6112

    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 United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Maurice Anderson in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against medical providers at a Virginia jail. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the three-judge panel found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Anderson v. Phillips, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Maurice Anderson in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against medical providers at a Virginia jail. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the three-judge panel found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissing the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-6112

    MAURICE ANDERSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ROGER PHILLIPS, M.D., Head Physician/Medical
    Director; ABDUL JAMALUDEEN, M.D., Physician;
    CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, Jails Medical
    Company,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.
    (CA-00-868-2)

    Submitted:

    April 12, 2001

    Decided:

    April 18, 2001

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Maurice Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Maurice Anderson, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district
    courts order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp.
    2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. 1915A (West Supp. 2000).

    We

    have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find
    no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

    the district court.

    Anderson v. Phillips, No. CA-00-868-2 (E.D.

    Va. Dec. 13, 2000).

    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