Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lane v. Strickland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    Lloyd Steven Lane filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Lane appealed the denial. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, dispensing with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-02-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-6874

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Lloyd Steven Lane filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Lane appealed the denial. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, dispensing with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    Copyright:

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

    Lane v. Strickland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Lloyd Steven Lane filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Lane appealed the denial. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate's recommendation. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, dispensing with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 95-6874

    LLOYD STEVEN LANE,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    ROOSEVELT STRICKLAND; BYRON WALTERS; BARRY
    DEESE,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    G. WAYNE SPEARS; LYNN C. PHILLIPS; CAROL
    WHITAKER; H. R. BRIGMAN; JOHN WILLIAMS; JERRY
    MCQUEEN; L. W. MOORE; SANDRA THOMAS; YVONNE
    LOCKLEAR; VICKY CAULDER; JOHN BULLOCK; JAMES
    SANDERSON; JOHN R. MILLS,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District
    Judge. (CA-93-352-5-F)
    Submitted:

    February 7, 1996

    Decided:

    February 21, 1996

    Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lloyd Steven Lane, Appellant Pro Se. Jacob Leonard Safron, Special
    Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 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. Lane v. Strickland, No. CA-93-352-5-F (E.D.N.C. Apr. 28, 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