De'Lonta v. Johnson
This text of De'Lonta v. Johnson (De'Lonta v. Johnson) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 08-7282
OPHELIA DE’LONTA, f/k/a M. Stokes, f/k/a Michael A. Stokes,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GENE JOHNSON; ROBIN HULBERT; ALVIN BASKERVILLE; E. BARKSDALE; MAGGIE NEAL; SUSAN CARSON; SHANDA W. DAWKINS; MAJOR LEWIS; MAJOR ROWLETTE; DR. FISHER; D. KECK; DAWN GOODE; CPT. ALLEN; EDDIE L. PEARSON, Warden; W. P. ROGERS, Regional Director; G.K. WASHINGTON, Regional Director; OFFICER LEE, Correctional Officer; OFFICER MOSBY, Correctional Officer; OFFICER WHITHEY, Correctional Officer; OFFICER COSBY, Correctional Officer; OFFICER BLUNT, Correctional Officer; OFFICER FLEMING, Correctional Officer; OFFICER GRAY, Correctional Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Theresa C. Buchanan, Magistrate Judge. (1:05-cv-01469-TCB)
Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 5, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ophelia De’Lonta, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, Elizabeth Martin Muldowney, RAWLS & MCNELIS, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2 PER CURIAM:
Ophelia De’Lonta appeals the magistrate judge’s
stipulation of dismissal order. * We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the magistrate judge in her order denying
De’Lonta’s motion to dismiss settlement. De’Lonta v. Johnson,
No. 1:05-cv-01469-TCB (E.D. Va. filed July 2 & entered July 3,
2008). 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
* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
De'Lonta v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delonta-v-johnson-ca4-2009.