Douglas Brice Jordan v. Glenno Williams
This text of 60 F.3d 822 (Douglas Brice Jordan v. Glenno Williams) 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
60 F.3d 822
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Douglas Brice JORDAN, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Glenno WILLIAMS, Defendant--Appellee.
No. 95-6590.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 29, 1995.
Douglas Brice Jordan, Appellant Pro Se.
E.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, 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. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Jordan v. Williams, No. CA-95-125-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Mar. 28, 1995). 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
60 F.3d 822, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24886, 1995 WL 384437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglas-brice-jordan-v-glenno-williams-ca4-1995.