Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Grimes v. Fowler, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views3 pages
    Timothy Grimes filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against various prison officials and staff alleging violations of his civil rights. The case proceeded to a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. The jury found in favor of the defendants. Grimes appealed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in accordance with the jury verdict, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court already.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-07-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-6209

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Timothy Grimes filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against various prison officials and staff alleging violations of his civil rights. The case proceeded to a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. The jury found in favor of the defendants. Grimes appealed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in accordance with the jury verdict, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court already.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    14 views3 pages

    Grimes v. Fowler, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Timothy Grimes filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against various prison officials and staff alleging violations of his civil rights. The case proceeded to a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. The jury found in favor of the defendants. Grimes appealed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in accordance with the jury verdict, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court already.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-6209

    TIMOTHY GRIMES,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    R. FOWLER; G. JOHNSON; W. P. TRUE; JOHN DOES,
    Officials of ROSP; CAPTAIN HOCKETT; W. SMITH;
    M. BUCHANAN; J. BENTLEY; JOHN DOES, Officials
    of WRSP; JOHN DOES, Practitioners ROSP; JEAN
    DOES, Red Onion State Prison; SERGEANT HEAD;
    PRISON GUARD BOWEN; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
    OWENS,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    T. JOHNSON; A. BAKER,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap.
    James P. Jones, Chief
    District Judge and Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CA-01-526-2)

    Submitted:

    July 15, 2004

    Decided:

    Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    July 21, 2004

    Timothy Grimes, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Foster Barr, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Alexander Leonard
    Taylor, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond,
    Virginia; Gary Clay Hancock, Timothy Edmond Kirtner, GILMER,
    SADLER, INGRAM, SUTHERLAND & HUTTON, Pulaski, Virginia, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Timothy

    Grimes

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    granting judgment in favor of the Appellees in his 42 U.S.C. 1983


    (2000) action in accordance with a jury verdict.
    the record and find no reversible error.
    the judgment of the district court.
    01-526-2 (W.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2004).

    We have reviewed

    Accordingly, we affirm

    See Grimes v. Fowler, No. CAWe 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

    - 3 -

    You might also like