Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    David M. Simms v. Charles Hall, Magistrate, 996 F.2d 1212, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    David Simms appealed a magistrate judge's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the magistrate judge in their previous denial of Simms' claims. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented in the case materials so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    David M. Simms v. Charles Hall, Magistrate, 996 F.2d 1212, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    David Simms appealed a magistrate judge's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the magistrate judge in their previous denial of Simms' claims. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented in the case materials so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-06-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 996 F.2d 1212 Docket: 93-6344

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    David Simms appealed a magistrate judge's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the magistrate judge in their previous denial of Simms' claims. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented in the case materials so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    David M. Simms v. Charles Hall, Magistrate, 996 F.2d 1212, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    David Simms appealed a magistrate judge's denial of relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the magistrate judge in their previous denial of Simms' claims. The facts and legal arguments were adequately represented in the case materials so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    996 F.

    2d 1212

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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.
    David M. SIMMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Charles HALL, Magistrate, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 93-6344.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 7, 1993.
    Decided: June 24, 1993.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate Judge. (CA-92-679-R)
    David M. Simms, Appellant Pro Se.
    Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond,
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    W.D.Va.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    OPINION
    1

    David M. Simms appeals from the magistrate judge's order denying relief under
    42 U.S.C. 1983 (1988).* Our review of the record and the magistrate judge's

    opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on


    the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Simms v. Hall, No. CA-92-679-R (W.D.
    Va. Mar. 26, 1993). 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

    The parties consented to the magistrate judge's jurisdiction pursuant to 28


    U.S.C. 636(c) (1988)

    You might also like