Gerald Davis Fuller v. Richard Lanham, Sr. Kenneth E. Taylor John Peterson J.M. Dean R. Richie Brian Irwin Larry Stewart Doris Wyatt

37 F.3d 1493, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34818, 1994 WL 557003
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 12, 1994
Docket93-7030
StatusPublished

This text of 37 F.3d 1493 (Gerald Davis Fuller v. Richard Lanham, Sr. Kenneth E. Taylor John Peterson J.M. Dean R. Richie Brian Irwin Larry Stewart Doris Wyatt) 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
Gerald Davis Fuller v. Richard Lanham, Sr. Kenneth E. Taylor John Peterson J.M. Dean R. Richie Brian Irwin Larry Stewart Doris Wyatt, 37 F.3d 1493, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34818, 1994 WL 557003 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

37 F.3d 1493
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Gerald Davis FULLER, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Richard LANHAM, Sr.; Kenneth E. Taylor; John Peterson;
J.M. Dean; R. Richie; Brian Irwin; Larry
Stewart; Doris Wyatt, Defendants Appellees.

No. 93-7030.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 19, 1994.
Decided: Oct. 12, 1994.

Gerald Davis Fuller, appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Audrey J. S. Carrion, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, 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 accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Fuller v. Lanham, No. CA-93-102-WN (D. Md. Sept. 17, 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.

AFFIRMED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 F.3d 1493, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34818, 1994 WL 557003, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerald-davis-fuller-v-richard-lanham-sr-kenneth-e--ca4-1994.