Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • May v. Tucker, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Edward Wayne May's civil action against E. Montgomery Tucker. The district court properly construed May's action as a request for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 rather than as a civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissal. The Court of Appeals also stated that it would deny a certificate of appealability if the case were a habeas action.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-07-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7537

    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 dismissal without prejudice of Edward Wayne May's civil action against E. Montgomery Tucker. The district court properly construed May's action as a request for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 rather than as a civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissal. The Court of Appeals also stated that it would deny a certificate of appealability if the case were a habeas action.

    Copyright:

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

    May v. Tucker, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal without prejudice of Edward Wayne May's civil action against E. Montgomery Tucker. The district court properly construed May's action as a request for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 rather than as a civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court of Appeals found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for dismissal. The Court of Appeals also stated that it would deny a certificate of appealability if the case were a habeas action.

    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. 97-7537

    EDWARD WAYNE MAY,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    E. MONTGOMERY TUCKER,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
    Judge. (CA-97-1443-AM)

    Submitted:

    June 18, 1998

    Decided:

    July 2, 1998

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


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Edward Wayne May, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district courts order dismissing without prejudice his civil action purportedly filed under 42 U.S.C.
    1983 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district courts
    opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. May v. Tucker, No. CA-97-1443-AM
    (E.D. Va. Oct. 7, 1997). Insofar as the district court properly
    construed this action as a request for habeas relief under 28
    U.S.C.A. 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), we note that we would
    deny a certificate of appealability. 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