Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman, Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman

Fourth Circuit

Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman, Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman

73 F.3d 357, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40385

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 22, 1995

Docket95-7359

StatusPublished

This text of 73 F.3d 357 (Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman, Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman) 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

Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman, Arthur Lee Gooden, II v. Sergeant Terry Bobby Soles Lieutenant Seay Ms. Estep John B. Taylor Larry W. Huffman, 73 F.3d 357, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40385 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

73 F.3d 357
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Arthur Lee GOODEN, II, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Sergeant TERRY; Bobby Soles; Lieutenant Seay; Ms. Estep;
John B. Taylor; Larry W. Huffman, Defendants--Appellees.
Arthur Lee GOODEN, II, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Sergeant TERRY; Bobby Soles; Lieutenant Seay; Ms. Estep;
John B. Taylor; Larry W. Huffman, Defendants--Appellees.

Nos. 95-7359, 95-7393.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Dec. 22, 1995.

Arthur Lee Gooden, II, Appellant Pro Se.

Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gooden v. Terry, No. CA-94-1107-R (W.D.Va. June 9, 1995; Aug. 9, 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

73 F.3d 357
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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.

Arthur Lee GOODEN, II, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Sergeant TERRY; Bobby Soles; Lieutenant Seay; Ms. Estep;
John B. Taylor; Larry W. Huffman, Defendants--Appellees.
Arthur Lee GOODEN, II, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Sergeant TERRY; Bobby Soles; Lieutenant Seay; Ms. Estep;
John B. Taylor; Larry W. Huffman, Defendants--Appellees.

Nos. 95-7359, 95-7393.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Dec. 22, 1995.

Arthur Lee Gooden, II, Appellant Pro Se.

Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gooden v. Terry, No. CA-94-1107-R (W.D.Va. June 9, 1995; Aug. 9, 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)

73 F.3d 357, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-lee-gooden-ii-v-sergeant-terry-bobby-soles-lieutenant-seay-ms-ca4-1995.