Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Kennedy Williams v. Charlie J. Cepak, Warden Pris MacK Associate Warden, Individually, and in Their Official Capacities, 73 F.3d 359, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kennedy Williams filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint against prison officials Charlie Cepak and Pris Mack which was denied by the district court. Williams appealed the denial to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court of Appeals declined to hear oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Kennedy Williams v. Charlie J. Cepak, Warden Pris MacK Associate Warden, Individually, and in Their Official Capacities, 73 F.3d 359, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views1 page
    Kennedy Williams filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint against prison officials Charlie Cepak and Pris Mack which was denied by the district court. Williams appealed the denial to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court of Appeals declined to hear oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-12-21 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 73 F.3d 359 Docket: 95-7224

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Kennedy Williams filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint against prison officials Charlie Cepak and Pris Mack which was denied by the district court. Williams appealed the denial to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court of Appeals declined to hear oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Kennedy Williams v. Charlie J. Cepak, Warden Pris MacK Associate Warden, Individually, and in Their Official Capacities, 73 F.3d 359, 4th Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kennedy Williams filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint against prison officials Charlie Cepak and Pris Mack which was denied by the district court. Williams appealed the denial to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial, finding no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Court of Appeals declined to hear oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    73 F.

    3d 359
    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.

    Kennedy WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,


    v.
    Charlie J. CEPAK, Warden; Pris Mack, Associate Warden,
    Individually, and in their official capacities,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 95-7224.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: December 12, 1995.
    Decided: December 21, 1995.

    Kennedy Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Holly Saleeby Atkins, Columbia,


    SC, for Appellees.
    Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district
    court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no
    reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
    Williams v. Cepak, No. CA-94-3007-6-2AK (D.S.C. July 31, 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