Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    Brocco v. Savage, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James and Olga Brocco in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Brocco v. Savage, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    19 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James and Olga Brocco in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-11-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-1824

    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 denial of relief to James and Olga Brocco in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Brocco v. Savage, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James and Olga Brocco in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The Court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    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. 01-1824

    JAMES M. BROCCO; OLGA BROCCO,


    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    RICKY SAVAGE,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    and
    ED WOODARD; COUNTY OF FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA; THE
    FITNESS COMPANY; HYATT CORPORATION,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-00-1685-A)

    Submitted:

    November 19, 2001

    Decided:

    November 28, 2001

    Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Victor M. Glasberg, Kelly M. Baldrate, VICTOR M. GLASBERG & ASSOCIATES, Alexandria, Virginia; Henry W. Asbill, William B. Moffitt,
    ASBILL, JUNKIN, MOFFITT & BOSS, CHTD., Washington, D.C., for
    Appellants. David J. Fudala, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James and Olga Brocco appeal the district courts order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint.
    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and
    find no reversible error.
    of the district court.
    (E.D. Va. May 18, 2001).

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning


    See Brocco v. Savage, No. CA-00-1685-A
    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