Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Livesay v. Ward, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to John Livesay in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against W.O. Ward and other defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It denied Livesay's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of the defendants.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-07-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6742

    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 John Livesay in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against W.O. Ward and other defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It denied Livesay's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of the defendants.

    Copyright:

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

    Livesay v. Ward, 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 John Livesay in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against W.O. Ward and other defendants. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It denied Livesay's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of the defendants.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 01-6742

    JOHN LIVESAY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    W. O. WARD, Medical Doctor,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    and
    RIVERSIDE
    REGIONAL
    Superintendent,

    JAIL;

    DARNLEY

    HODGE,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge.
    (CA-98-1351-2)

    Submitted:

    July 12, 2001

    Decided:

    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    July 20, 2001

    John Livesay, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Paul Falzone, John Kenneth
    Byrum, Jr., Chandra Dore Lantz, HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG, COX
    & ALLEN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    John Livesay appeals the district courts order denying relief
    on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint.

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no
    reversible error.
    district court.
    28, 2001).

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the


    Livesay v. Ward, No. CA-98-1351-2 (E.D. Va. Mar.

    We deny Livesays motion to appoint counsel and dis-

    pense 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