Michael X. Steven Fitz v. Counselor McCormick C. Manis D. Graham Jim Bruce Rufus Fleming Patrick J. Gurney Richard A. Young

Fourth Circuit

Michael X. Steven Fitz v. Counselor McCormick C. Manis D. Graham Jim Bruce Rufus Fleming Patrick J. Gurney Richard A. Young

60 F.3d 821, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24794, 1995 WL 381908

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 28, 1995

Docket95-6431

StatusPublished

This text of 60 F.3d 821 (Michael X. Steven Fitz v. Counselor McCormick C. Manis D. Graham Jim Bruce Rufus Fleming Patrick J. Gurney Richard A. Young) 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

Michael X. Steven Fitz v. Counselor McCormick C. Manis D. Graham Jim Bruce Rufus Fleming Patrick J. Gurney Richard A. Young, 60 F.3d 821, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24794, 1995 WL 381908 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

60 F.3d 821
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Michael X. Steven FITZ, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Counselor McCORMICK; C. Manis; D. Graham; Jim Bruce;
Rufus Fleming; Patrick J. Gurney; Richard A.
Young, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6431.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 28, 1995.

Michael X. Steven Fitz, Appellant Pro Se. Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, 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. Fitz v. McCormick, No. CA-94-246 (E.D. Va. Mar. 17, 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

60 F.3d 821
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.

Michael X. Steven FITZ, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Counselor McCORMICK; C. Manis; D. Graham; Jim Bruce;
Rufus Fleming; Patrick J. Gurney; Richard A.
Young, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6431.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 28, 1995.

Michael X. Steven Fitz, Appellant Pro Se. Lance Bradford Leggitt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, 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. Fitz v. McCormick, No. CA-94-246 (E.D. Va. Mar. 17, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 F.3d 821, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24794, 1995 WL 381908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-x-steven-fitz-v-counselor-mccormick-c-mani-ca4-1995.