Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Corey James v. Fred Nastri, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    21 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal filed by Corey Lamonde James of a district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-12-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-7058

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal filed by Corey Lamonde James of a district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Corey James v. Fred Nastri, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal filed by Corey Lamonde James of a district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its opinion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 11-7058

    COREY LAMONDE JAMES,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    FRED NASTRI, HO; JOSEPH F. NEDER, Ex-Warden NBCI; DAVID
    WILHELM,
    Sgt.;
    WARDEN
    BOBBY
    SHEARIN;
    JOHN
    ROWLEY,
    Ex-Warden; BRIAN MOORE, Ex-CO II NBCI; DAVE COWEN, Ex-Sgt.
    NBCI; J. E. COMBS, Ex-CO II NBCI; MAXINE BRYANT; AL DAVIS,
    HO,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    Alexander Williams, Jr., District
    Judge. (8:10-cv-02272-AW)

    Submitted:

    December 15, 2011

    Decided:

    December 20, 2011

    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Corey Lamonde James, Appellant Pro Se. Glen William Bell, OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Corey Lamonde James appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint.
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    James

    v.

    Nastri,

    No.

    8:10-cv-02272-AW

    July 13, 2011 & entered July 14, 2011).

    (D.

    Md.

    filed

    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