Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    Watts v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. James Edmond Watts filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Octavia Johnson, the sheriff. The district court denied Watts relief. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments because the facts and legal issues were clear based on the documents submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Watts v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. James Edmond Watts filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Octavia Johnson, the sheriff. The district court denied Watts relief. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments because the facts and legal issues were clear based on the documents submitted.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-10-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-7110

    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 summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. James Edmond Watts filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Octavia Johnson, the sheriff. The district court denied Watts relief. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments because the facts and legal issues were clear based on the documents submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    Watts v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. James Edmond Watts filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Octavia Johnson, the sheriff. The district court denied Watts relief. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments because the facts and legal issues were clear based on the documents submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-7110

    JAMES EDMOND WATTS,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    OCTAVIA JOHNSON, Sheriff,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    Samuel G. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:07-cv-00323-sgw)

    Submitted:

    October 18, 2007

    Decided:

    October 26, 2007

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James Edmond Watts, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    James Edmond Watts appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Watts v.


    Johnson, No. 7:07-cv-00323-sgw (W.D. Va. July 18, 2007).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like