Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • White v. Clark, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    Rodney White appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action for failure to state a claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the reasoning of the district court, which had dismissed White's case for failing to state a valid claim. The appellate court also decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-02-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7390

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Rodney White appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action for failure to state a claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the reasoning of the district court, which had dismissed White's case for failing to state a valid claim. The appellate court also decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained 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

    White v. Clark, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Rodney White appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action for failure to state a claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible error. The appellate court affirmed the reasoning of the district court, which had dismissed White's case for failing to state a valid claim. The appellate court also decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately explained 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 03-7390

    RODNEY WHITE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    COUNSELOR CLARK; LIEUTENANT COMPTON; SERGEANT
    ANDERSON; JESSEE; WARDEN YOUNG; INVESTIGATOR
    WILLIAMS; MAJOR YATES; B. J. DAVIS, Operations
    Officer; WARDEN PHILLIS; S. RIDER; R. RAVIZEE,
    Grievance Department; L. HUFFMAN, Regional
    Director; SERGEANT COPE,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
    Judge. (CA-03-392-7)

    Submitted:

    January 28, 2004

    Decided:

    February 13, 2004

    Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Rodney White, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Rodney Fernell White appeals from the dismissal of his 42
    U.S.C. 1983 (2000) action for failure to state a claim pursuant
    to 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(1) (2000).

    We have reviewed the district

    courts opinion and find no reversible error.


    the reasoning of the district court.
    392-7 (W.D. Va. Aug. 6, 2003).

    Thus, we affirm on

    White v. Clark, No. CA-03-

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like