Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Alexander Matthews v. Ted Hull, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Alexander Matthews' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The district court had dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-06-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6310

    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 of Alexander Matthews' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The district court had dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    Alexander Matthews v. Ted Hull, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Alexander Matthews' 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The district court had dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 14-6310

    ALEXANDER OTIS MATTHEWS,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    TED HULL; R. MICHELLE LEWIS; MARTIN, Sergeant; JOHN
    DOE/JANE DOE RECREATION SUPERVISOR; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE
    DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL SERVICES; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE CLEANING
    SUPERVISOR; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE FOOD SERVICES SUPERVISOR;
    JOHN DOE/JANE DOE UNIT NURSE; NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL
    BOARD AUTHORITY MEMBERS; LYNN SUDDUTH,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (1:13-cv-00450-LO-JFA)

    Submitted:

    June 26, 2014

    Decided: June 30, 2014

    Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Alexander Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Broderick Coleman Dunn,


    Alexander Francuzenko, COOK CRAIG & FRANCUZENKO, PLLC, Fairfax,
    Virginia, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Alexander Matthews appeals the district courts order
    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
    1915A(b) (2012).
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    Matthews v. Hull, No. 1:13-cv-00450-LO-

    JFA (E.D. Va. Feb. 12, 2014).

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented


    in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
    the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like