Medley v. Terrangi
This text of Medley v. Terrangi (Medley v. Terrangi) 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
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6683
VINCENT DEPAUL MEDLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
P. A. TERRANGI, Warden; MAXINE PORCHER, T.C. Director; S. CHRIS JONES, Assistant Programs,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CA-03-224-2)
Submitted: June 18, 2003 Decided: October 29, 2003
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent DePaul Medley, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Vincent DePaul Medley appeals the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Medley v. Terrangi, No. CA-03-224-2 (E.D. Va. filed Apr.
17, 2003 & entered Apr. 18, 2003). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Medley v. Terrangi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medley-v-terrangi-ca4-2003.