Holsey v. Smith

60 F.3d 822, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24880, 1995 WL 384592
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 29, 1995
Docket95-6510
StatusPublished

This text of 60 F.3d 822 (Holsey 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
Holsey v. Smith, 60 F.3d 822, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24880, 1995 WL 384592 (4th Cir. 1995).

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NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Aaron HOLSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William SMITH; Reaheon Getachew; Unknown Psychiatrist;
Roy Clymer; El-Beshir; Pappas; Claudette Michel;
Michelle Martin; Archlie Gee; Richard Plies, All sued
individually and in their official capacities, Defendants-Appellees,
and
LIBERSTEIN; DOCTOR PIKE; Mamichell Cordett; Richard
Place, Defendants.

No. 95-6510.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 29, 1995.

Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Richard M. Kastendieck, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD; Philip Melton Andrews, Geoffrey Hawthorne Genth, Kramon & Graham, P.A., Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

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. Holsey v. Smith, No. CA-92-2630-K (D. Md. Mar. 16, 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.

AFFIRMED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 F.3d 822, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24880, 1995 WL 384592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holsey-v-smith-ca4-1995.