Clifford A. Jackson v. Thomas Corcoran, Warden, Individual Fitzhugh Herring Kenneth A. Pitts James Moore Ronald D. Leverette Freda Woods

25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20915, 1994 WL 202530
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 24, 1994
Docket94-6292
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1039 (Clifford A. Jackson v. Thomas Corcoran, Warden, Individual Fitzhugh Herring Kenneth A. Pitts James Moore Ronald D. Leverette Freda Woods) 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
Clifford A. Jackson v. Thomas Corcoran, Warden, Individual Fitzhugh Herring Kenneth A. Pitts James Moore Ronald D. Leverette Freda Woods, 25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20915, 1994 WL 202530 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1039
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Clifford A. JACKSON, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Thomas CORCORAN, Warden, Individual; Fitzhugh Herring;
Kenneth A. Pitts; James Moore; Ronald D.
Leverette; Freda Woods, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6292.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 21, 1994.
Decided: May 24, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. M. J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-93-2646-MJG)

Clifford A. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se.

Audrey J. S. Carrion, Office of The Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, 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 and denying his motion for an injunction. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Jackson v. Corcoran, No. CA-93-2646-MJG (D. Md. Feb. 3, 1994). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20915, 1994 WL 202530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clifford-a-jackson-v-thomas-corcoran-warden-indivi-ca4-1994.