Johnny Lee Stewart v. szabo/a.r.a. Correctional Services, C/o Portsmouth Sheriff's Department Eddie Talley, Supervisor

25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20841, 1994 WL 197116
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 18, 1994
Docket94-6068
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1041 (Johnny Lee Stewart v. szabo/a.r.a. Correctional Services, C/o Portsmouth Sheriff's Department Eddie Talley, Supervisor) 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
Johnny Lee Stewart v. szabo/a.r.a. Correctional Services, C/o Portsmouth Sheriff's Department Eddie Talley, Supervisor, 25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20841, 1994 WL 197116 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1041
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Johnny Lee STEWART, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
SZABO/A.R.A. CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, C/O Portsmouth Sheriff's
Department; Eddie Talley, Supervisor, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6068.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 3, 1994.
Decided: May 18, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-43-2)

Johnny Lee Stewart, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

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 discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal on the merits on the reasoning of the district court. Stewart v. Szabo ARA, No. CA-94-43-2 (E.D. Va. Jan. 14, 1994). However, we modify that dismissal to vacate the portion of the order which prohibited Appellant from filing in forma pauperis in a future action; such a determination may only be made when any future action is actually filed. 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 AS MODIFIED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20841, 1994 WL 197116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnny-lee-stewart-v-szaboara-correctional-service-ca4-1994.