Radford v. Mangum

23 F.3d 402, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18535, 1994 WL 192028
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 16, 1994
Docket93-2062
StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 402 (Radford v. Mangum) 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
Radford v. Mangum, 23 F.3d 402, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18535, 1994 WL 192028 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

23 F.3d 402
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Deborah Deane RADFORD, Administratrix of the Estate of
Jeffrey Dallas Radford, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
R. Richael MANGUM, Raleigh County Sheriff; J. R. Lilly,
Chief Corrections Officer; Other unnamed sheriff deputies &
agents of the Raleigh County, West Virginia Sheriff's
Department; County Commission of Raleigh County, West
Virginia, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 93-2062.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Argued: April 11, 1994.
Decided: May 16, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Elizabeth V. Hallanan, District Judge. (CA-91-828)

James E. Uschold, Hackett & Dunne, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellant.

Steven Paul McGowan, Steptoe & Johnson, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Robert L. Hackett, Hackett & Dunne, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellant.

John C. Stump, Steptoe & Johnson, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

S.D.W.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and TURK, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

We have reviewed the arguments raised by appellant in this case and have determined that they are without merit. We affirm on the thorough and well-reasoned opinion of the district court, Radford v. Mangum, No. 5:91-0828 (S.D. W. Va. July 21, 1993).

AFFIRMED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 F.3d 402, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18535, 1994 WL 192028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/radford-v-mangum-ca4-1994.