Crawford v. Smith
This text of Crawford v. Smith (Crawford v. Smith) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6759
CURTIS E. CRAWFORD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ROMAINE SMITH, Correctional Officer; JOHN DOE, Inmate,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-884)
Submitted: June 10, 2004 Decided: June 21, 2004
Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Curtis E. Crawford, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Curtis E. Crawford appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion to reinstate an action filed pursuant to
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403
U.S. 388 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act. He also appeals
the district court’s denial of his motion filed under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. See Crawford v. Smith,
No. CA-03-884 (E.D. Va. Apr. 23, 2004; Apr. 30, 2004). 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
- 2 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Crawford v. Smith, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crawford-v-smith-ca4-2004.