Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Richardson-Bey v. Beck, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Leroy Richardson-Bey filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various North Carolina prison officials that was denied by the district court. Richardson-Bey appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit relied on the reasoning of the district court, which denied relief on Richardson-Bey's § 1983 complaint.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Richardson-Bey v. Beck, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    Leroy Richardson-Bey filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various North Carolina prison officials that was denied by the district court. Richardson-Bey appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit relied on the reasoning of the district court, which denied relief on Richardson-Bey's § 1983 complaint.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-09-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-7005

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Leroy Richardson-Bey filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various North Carolina prison officials that was denied by the district court. Richardson-Bey appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit relied on the reasoning of the district court, which denied relief on Richardson-Bey's § 1983 complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    Richardson-Bey v. Beck, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Leroy Richardson-Bey filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various North Carolina prison officials that was denied by the district court. Richardson-Bey appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit relied on the reasoning of the district court, which denied relief on Richardson-Bey's § 1983 complaint.

    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. 01-7005

    LEROY RICHARDSON-BEY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    THEODIS BECK; JAMES B. FRENCH; LYNN OEHLING;
    MARY LOU ROGERS; BONNIE BOYETTE; DENNIS M.
    ROWLAND; J. BLANGO; F. BROWN, Lieutenant;
    SERGEANT WATSON; DAVID YATES; SUPERINTENDENT
    GRIMM; CYNTHIA BUTLER BOSTIC; R. B. LEE,
    Captain; ELIZABETH LAYCOCK; G. L. WOODARD,
    Superintendent; C. BATTEN; FRAN MINSHEW; RICK
    JACKSON, Superintendent; JULIA BRIGMAN; THOMAS
    J. ANDREWS; MR. WILKERSON; HATTIE B. PIMPONG,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
    Judge. (CA-01-262)

    Submitted:

    September 6, 2001

    Decided:

    September 14, 2001

    Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Leroy Richardson-Bey, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Leroy Richardson-Bey appeals the district courts order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint.
    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.

    Richardson-Bey v. Beck, No. CA-01-262

    (E.D.N.C. May 30, 2001).

    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