Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Vail v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views2 pages
    Herbert L. Vail III filed a § 1983 complaint against officials of the Virginia Department of Corrections which was denied by the district court. Vail appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief, 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 court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-07-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 00-6274

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Herbert L. Vail III filed a § 1983 complaint against officials of the Virginia Department of Corrections which was denied by the district court. Vail appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief, 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 court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Vail v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Herbert L. Vail III filed a § 1983 complaint against officials of the Virginia Department of Corrections which was denied by the district court. Vail appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief, 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 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 00-6274

    HERBERT L. VAIL, III,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE; LISA EDWARDS, Warden; LEE
    SULIVAN, Safety Specialist; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    James C. Turk, District Judge.
    (CA-00-45-7)

    Submitted:

    July 13, 2000

    Decided:

    July 21, 2000

    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Herbert L. Vail, III, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Herbert L. Vail, III, appeals the district courts order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint.
    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and
    find no reversible error.
    of the district court.
    Va. Feb. 8, 2000).

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

    See Vail v. Angelone, No. CA-00-45-7 (W.D.

    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