Parks v. Williams

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 30, 2002
Docket01-8067
StatusUnpublished

This text of Parks v. Williams (Parks v. Williams) 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
Parks v. Williams, (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-8067

DARRELL JAMES PARKS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ANTHONY WILLIAMS, Mayor of the District of Columbia; HULON L. WILLIS, District of Columbia-Representative Contractor; AVON C. QUERO, Unit Manager #4; EDDIE L. PEARSON, Chief Warden; RUFUS FLEMING, Regional Director; JAMES S. GILMORE, III, Virginia Governor,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-01-287)

Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Darrell James Parks, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene A. Adams, Kimberly C. Matthews, Andrew S. Hoenig, Charles Luverne Reischel, OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL, Washington, D.C.; Rick Randall Linker, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Darrell James Parks appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Parks v. Williams, No.

CA-01-287 (E.D. Va. Nov. 6, 2001). We deny Parks’ motion for

appointment of counsel. 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

Bluebook (online)
Parks v. Williams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parks-v-williams-ca4-2002.