Eugene Clay v. Gary Livesay, Warden

837 F.2d 1091, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 606, 1988 WL 4415
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 22, 1988
Docket86-6302
StatusUnpublished

This text of 837 F.2d 1091 (Eugene Clay v. Gary Livesay, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Eugene Clay v. Gary Livesay, Warden, 837 F.2d 1091, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 606, 1988 WL 4415 (6th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

837 F.2d 1091

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Eugene CLAY, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Gary LIVESAY, Warden, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 86-6302.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Jan. 22, 1988.

Before MERRITT and RYAN, Circuit Judges, and JOHN W. PECK, Senior Circuit Judge.

ORDER

This cause having come on to be heard upon the record, the briefs and the oral argument of the parties, and upon due consideration thereof,

The court finds that no prejudicial error intervened in the judgment and proceedings in the district court, and it hereby is affirmed upon the opinion of the district court.

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

Related

Canitia (Thomas O.) v. Yellow Freight System, Inc
837 F.2d 1091 (Sixth Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
837 F.2d 1091, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 606, 1988 WL 4415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eugene-clay-v-gary-livesay-warden-ca6-1988.