Davis v. Smith

14 F.3d 594, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5038, 1994 WL 14856
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 24, 1994
Docket93-7210
StatusUnpublished

This text of 14 F.3d 594 (Davis 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.

Bluebook
Davis v. Smith, 14 F.3d 594, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5038, 1994 WL 14856 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

14 F.3d 594

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Wallace S. DAVIS, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Glynis SMITH; Paramount Studios; Jefferson Pilot
Broadcasting Company, Channel 12; James Berry,
Sergeant; Virginia Department of
Corrections, Defendants Appellees.

No. 93-7210.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 16, 1993.
Decided Jan. 24, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge.

Wallace S. Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

Robert Harkness Herring, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Richmond, VA; Ira C. Wolpert, Foley & Lardner, Washington, D.C.; James LeRoy Banks, Jr., Christian, Barton, Epps, Brent & Chappell, Richmond, VA, for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his claims for civil rights violations, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988), and copyright infringement, 17 U.S.C.A. Sec. 501 (West 1977 & Supp.1993). 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. Davis v. Smith, No. CA-91-747-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 21, 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 F.3d 594, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5038, 1994 WL 14856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-smith-ca4-1994.