Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Davis v. United States Department of Justice, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Gregory Davis filed a complaint against the United States and federal agencies alleging violations under Bivens and the Federal Tort Claims Act. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied relief. Davis appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Davis v. United States Department of Justice, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Gregory Davis filed a complaint against the United States and federal agencies alleging violations under Bivens and the Federal Tort Claims Act. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied relief. Davis appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-03-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-6013

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Gregory Davis filed a complaint against the United States and federal agencies alleging violations under Bivens and the Federal Tort Claims Act. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied relief. Davis appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    Davis v. United States Department of Justice, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Gregory Davis filed a complaint against the United States and federal agencies alleging violations under Bivens and the Federal Tort Claims Act. The district court accepted the magistrate's recommendation and denied relief. Davis appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's ruling. The appeals court decided 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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 08-6013

    GREGORY DAVIS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE;
    UNITED STATES FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL
    INSTITUTION, GILMER; JOHN DOE MAIL ROOM STAFF EMPLOYEES,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
    District Judge. (1:07-cv-00063-IMK-JES)

    Submitted:

    March 25, 2008

    Decided:

    March 28, 2008

    Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Gregory Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Gregory

    Davis

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying


    relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown
    Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and
    the Federal Tort Claims Act.

    We have reviewed the record and find

    no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated


    by the district court.

    Davis v. USA, No. 1:07-cv-00063-IMK-JES

    (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 13, 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