Davey James Reedy v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Department of Corrections, Commonwealth of Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Davey James Reedy v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Department of Corrections, Commonwealth of Virginia

23 F.3d 402, 1994 WL 118124

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 4, 1994

Docket93-7326

StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 402 (Davey James Reedy v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Department of Corrections, Commonwealth of Virginia) 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

Davey James Reedy v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Department of Corrections, Commonwealth of Virginia, 23 F.3d 402, 1994 WL 118124 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

23 F.3d 402
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Davey James REEDY, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Department of Corrections,
Commonwealth of Virginia, et al., Defendant Appellee.

No. 93-7326.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 17, 1994.
Decided April 4, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-93-903-R).

Davey James Reedy, appellant Pro Se.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS and LUTTIG, 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. 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. Reedy v. Murray, No. CA-93-903-R (W.D. Va. Nov. 29, 1993). 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.

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

23 F.3d 402
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Davey James REEDY, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Department of Corrections,
Commonwealth of Virginia, et al., Defendant Appellee.

No. 93-7326.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 17, 1994.
Decided April 4, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-93-903-R).

Davey James Reedy, appellant Pro Se.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS and LUTTIG, 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. 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. Reedy v. Murray, No. CA-93-903-R (W.D. Va. Nov. 29, 1993). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 F.3d 402, 1994 WL 118124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davey-james-reedy-v-edward-w-murray-director-depar-ca4-1994.