Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Tatum v. Division of Correct, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Leamon Tatum. The district court properly entered summary judgment for the defendants because Tatum failed to respond to the summary judgment motion with any evidence despite two warnings from the court about the need to do so. The Court of Appeals also found no abuse of discretion in the district court's grant of an extension of time for the defendants to respond to Tatum's initial complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Tatum v. Division of Correct, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Leamon Tatum. The district court properly entered summary judgment for the defendants because Tatum failed to respond to the summary judgment motion with any evidence despite two warnings from the court about the need to do so. The Court of Appeals also found no abuse of discretion in the district court's grant of an extension of time for the defendants to respond to Tatum's initial complaint.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-11-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6879

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Leamon Tatum. The district court properly entered summary judgment for the defendants because Tatum failed to respond to the summary judgment motion with any evidence despite two warnings from the court about the need to do so. The Court of Appeals also found no abuse of discretion in the district court's grant of an extension of time for the defendants to respond to Tatum's initial complaint.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    11 views3 pages

    Tatum v. Division of Correct, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a Section 1983 action brought by Leamon Tatum. The district court properly entered summary judgment for the defendants because Tatum failed to respond to the summary judgment motion with any evidence despite two warnings from the court about the need to do so. The Court of Appeals also found no abuse of discretion in the district court's grant of an extension of time for the defendants to respond to Tatum's initial complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-6879

    LEAMON L. TATUM,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    RICHARD LANHAM, Commissioner, Division of Corrections; JOHN SANDSTORM, Division of Corrections' Inmate Citation Adjuster; THOMAS PRICE,
    Division of Corrections' Inmate Citation
    Adjuster; LLOYD L. WATERS, Warden; WAYNE W.
    LEASE, Correctional Officer I; G. WIBLE, Correctional Officer II,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    DIVISION OF CORRECTION; MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL
    INSTITUTION,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA96-3899-S)
    Submitted:

    November 6, 1997

    Decided:

    November 25, 1997

    Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Leamon L. Tatum, Appellant Pro Se.
    John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
    Attorney General, Glenn T. Marrow, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
    OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Leamon A. Tatum appeals the district court's grant of summary
    judgment in favor of the Defendant in his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1994),
    action and the district court's grant of an extension of time for
    the Defendant to respond to Tatum's complaint. We affirm.
    Addressing the Defendant's motion for summary judgment, we
    note that the court twice informed Tatum of the necessity to
    respond under Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975).
    Despite these warnings, Tatum failed to respond with any evidence
    meeting the standard set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Thus, summary
    judgment was properly entered in favor of the Defendant.
    Turning to the motion for an extension of time, we find no
    abuse of discretion in the district court's grant of this motion
    where the request came shortly after the expiration of the response
    period. Accordingly, we affirm the district court in all respects.
    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