Anthony Atkins v. William W. Sweeney, Judge

Fourth Circuit

Anthony Atkins v. William W. Sweeney, Judge

59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23222, 1995 WL 373277

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 23, 1995

Docket95-6227

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 165 (Anthony Atkins v. William W. Sweeney, Judge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anthony Atkins v. William W. Sweeney, Judge, 59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23222, 1995 WL 373277 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

59 F.3d 165
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Anthony ATKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William W. SWEENEY, Judge, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-6227.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 23, 1995.

Anthony Atkins, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Atkins v. Sweeney, No. CA-95-29-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 10, 1995). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

59 F.3d 165
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Anthony ATKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William W. SWEENEY, Judge, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-6227.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 23, 1995.

Anthony Atkins, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Atkins v. Sweeney, No. CA-95-29-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 10, 1995). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23222, 1995 WL 373277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-atkins-v-william-w-sweeney-judge-ca4-1995.