Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Calvin Coolidge Hairston v. Cariton J. Evans, Investigator Grand Jurors of The Commonwealth of Virginia, 76 F.3d 372, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views1 page
    This document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from February 8, 1996. It involves plaintiff Calvin Coolidge Hairston filing a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against defendants Cariton J. Evans and Grand Jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The district court denied relief on Hairston's complaint and the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided by the lower court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-02-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 76 F.3d 372 Docket: 95-7929

    Original Title

    Calvin Coolidge Hairston v. Cariton J. Evans, Investigator Grand Jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 76 F.3d 372, 4th Cir. (1996)

    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 from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from February 8, 1996. It involves plaintiff Calvin Coolidge Hairston filing a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against defendants Cariton J. Evans and Grand Jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The district court denied relief on Hairston's complaint and the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided by the lower court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    3 views1 page

    Calvin Coolidge Hairston v. Cariton J. Evans, Investigator Grand Jurors of The Commonwealth of Virginia, 76 F.3d 372, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from February 8, 1996. It involves plaintiff Calvin Coolidge Hairston filing a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against defendants Cariton J. Evans and Grand Jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The district court denied relief on Hairston's complaint and the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the reasoning provided by the lower court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    Copyright:

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

    76 F.

    3d 372

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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.
    Calvin Coolidge HAIRSTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Cariton J. EVANS, Investigator; Grand Jurors of the
    Commonwealth of Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 95-7929.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: January 18, 1996.
    Decided: February 8, 1996.

    Calvin Coolidge Hairston, Appellant Pro Se.


    Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, 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.
    1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's
    opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning
    of the district court. Hairston v. Evans, No. CA-95-1191-R (W.D.Va. Nov. 7,
    1995). 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