Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Robinson v. Graham, 4th Cir. (1996)

    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. Tommy R. Robinson filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two state corrections officials, Joan Graham and Alvin Wooden, which was dismissed as frivolous by the district court. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's decision to dismiss the case. The appeals court adopted the reasoning of the district court without requiring oral arguments.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Robinson v. Graham, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Tommy R. Robinson filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two state corrections officials, Joan Graham and Alvin Wooden, which was dismissed as frivolous by the district court. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's decision to dismiss the case. The appeals court adopted the reasoning of the district court without requiring oral arguments.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-10-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6153

    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. Tommy R. Robinson filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two state corrections officials, Joan Graham and Alvin Wooden, which was dismissed as frivolous by the district court. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's decision to dismiss the case. The appeals court adopted the reasoning of the district court without requiring oral arguments.

    Copyright:

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

    Robinson v. Graham, 4th Cir. (1996)

    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. Tommy R. Robinson filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two state corrections officials, Joan Graham and Alvin Wooden, which was dismissed as frivolous by the district court. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the lower court's decision to dismiss the case. The appeals court adopted the reasoning of the district court without requiring oral arguments.

    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. 96-6153

    TOMMY R. ROBINSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JOAN GRAHAM, Case Manager Supervisor; ALVIN
    WOODEN, Case Worker,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-953741-AMD)
    Submitted:

    September 20, 1996

    Decided:

    October 3, 1996

    Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Tommy R. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing
    as frivolous his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1994) 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. Robinson v. Graham, No. CA-95-3741-AMD (D. Md. Dec.
    21, 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