Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Ealey v. Hawley, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by William Thomas Ealey, Jr. under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Ealey and the appellate court affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-01-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-7375

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by William Thomas Ealey, Jr. under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Ealey and the appellate court affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding 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
    8 views2 pages

    Ealey v. Hawley, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by William Thomas Ealey, Jr. under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Ealey and the appellate court affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 95-7375

    WILLIAM THOMAS EALEY, JR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CHARLES HAWLEY; THOMAS BREEDLOVE; JANE DOE;
    JOHN KEKU, Doctor; DOCTOR LITES; DOCTOR
    BALOCH; DOCTOR SMITH; DOCTOR DANIELS; JOHN
    DOE; DOCTOR DAVENPORT; MS. KELLY; DOCTOR SHAH;
    V. L. EVANS; PERCY DAVIS; MR. BATTEN; LYNN
    PHILLIPS,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
    Judge. (CA-95-490-CT-H)
    Submitted:

    December 14, 1995

    Decided:

    January 17, 1996

    Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Thomas Ealey, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
    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 and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court. Ealey v. Hawley, No. CA-95-490-CT-H (E.D.N.C. Aug. 23,
    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