Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Kevin Nathaniel Caudle v. L. Smith, JR., Sergeant, and Chesapeake City Jail John H. Newhart, Sheriff, 51 F.3d 265, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Kevin Nathaniel Caudle filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against a sergeant and jail officials alleging constitutional violations. The district court denied relief and adopted the magistrate's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented, so oral arguments were not necessary. The court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny relief to Caudle.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-04-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 51 F.3d 265 Docket: 95-6086

    Original Title

    Kevin Nathaniel Caudle v. L. Smith, Jr., Sergeant, and Chesapeake City Jail John H. Newhart, Sheriff, 51 F.3d 265, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Kevin Nathaniel Caudle filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against a sergeant and jail officials alleging constitutional violations. The district court denied relief and adopted the magistrate's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented, so oral arguments were not necessary. The court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny relief to Caudle.

    Copyright:

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

    Kevin Nathaniel Caudle v. L. Smith, JR., Sergeant, and Chesapeake City Jail John H. Newhart, Sheriff, 51 F.3d 265, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It summarizes a case where Kevin Nathaniel Caudle filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against a sergeant and jail officials alleging constitutional violations. The district court denied relief and adopted the magistrate's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented, so oral arguments were not necessary. The court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny relief to Caudle.

    Copyright:

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

    51 F.

    3d 265

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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.
    Kevin Nathaniel CAUDLE, Plaintiff--Appellant,
    v.
    L. SMITH, Jr., Sergeant, Defendant--Appellee,
    and
    Chesapeake City Jail; John H. Newhart, Sheriff, Defendants.
    No. 95-6086.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted March 15, 1995
    Decided April 11, 1995

    Kevin Nathaniel Caudle, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Douglas Stiles,


    WILLCOX & SAVAGE, Norfolk, VA, for Appellees.
    Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's
    opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that
    this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
    district court. Caudle v. Smith, No. 93-992 (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