Carl Barley v. Keith W. Brown Officer Adams Officer Woodward, and Keith Osborne

Fourth Circuit

Carl Barley v. Keith W. Brown Officer Adams Officer Woodward, and Keith Osborne

59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23220, 1995 WL 376167

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 26, 1995

Docket95-6345

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 165 (Carl Barley v. Keith W. Brown Officer Adams Officer Woodward, and Keith Osborne) 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

Carl Barley v. Keith W. Brown Officer Adams Officer Woodward, and Keith Osborne, 59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23220, 1995 WL 376167 (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NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Carl BARLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Keith W. BROWN; Officer Adams; Officer Woodward,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
Keith OSBORNE, Defendant.

No. 95-6345.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Carl Barley, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Christine Maggard, Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Barley v. Osborne, No. CA-93-484-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 13, 1994 & Feb. 16, 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NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Carl BARLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Keith W. BROWN; Officer Adams; Officer Woodward,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
Keith OSBORNE, Defendant.

No. 95-6345.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Carl Barley, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Christine Maggard, Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Barley v. Osborne, No. CA-93-484-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 13, 1994 & Feb. 16, 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 23220, 1995 WL 376167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carl-barley-v-keith-w-brown-officer-adams-officer--ca4-1995.