Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Starke v. Avamark Refreshment, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Occea Starke filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Avamark Refreshment Services, the Sheriff of Henrico County Jail, and the Kitchen Supervisor of the jail. The district court denied Starke's complaint without prejudice. Starke then filed a Rule 59(e) motion, which the district court also denied. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the rulings of the district court, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-03-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-7960

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Occea Starke filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Avamark Refreshment Services, the Sheriff of Henrico County Jail, and the Kitchen Supervisor of the jail. The district court denied Starke's complaint without prejudice. Starke then filed a Rule 59(e) motion, which the district court also denied. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the rulings of the district court, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Starke v. Avamark Refreshment, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Occea Starke filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Avamark Refreshment Services, the Sheriff of Henrico County Jail, and the Kitchen Supervisor of the jail. The district court denied Starke's complaint without prejudice. Starke then filed a Rule 59(e) motion, which the district court also denied. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the rulings of the district court, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case 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. 01-7960

    OCCEA STARKE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    AVAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES; M. WADE, Sheriff
    of Henrico County Jail; WAYNE HEAD, Kitchen
    Supervisor,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District
    Judge. (CA-01-687-2)

    Submitted:

    February 28, 2002

    Decided:

    March 18, 2002

    Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Occea Starke, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Occea Starke appeals the district courts orders denying relief without prejudice on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 2001)
    complaint and denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinions and
    find no reversible error.
    of the district court.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

    Starke v. Avamark Refreshment Servs., No.

    CA-01-687-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 4, 2001; Nov. 15, 2001).

    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