Robert Lee Brock, A/K/A Two Souls Walker v. James T. Wise, Attorney at Law

Fourth Circuit

Robert Lee Brock, A/K/A Two Souls Walker v. James T. Wise, Attorney at Law

72 F.3d 126, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39539, 1995 WL 747071

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 15, 1995

Docket95-7484

StatusPublished

This text of 72 F.3d 126 (Robert Lee Brock, A/K/A Two Souls Walker v. James T. Wise, Attorney at Law) 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

Robert Lee Brock, A/K/A Two Souls Walker v. James T. Wise, Attorney at Law, 72 F.3d 126, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39539, 1995 WL 747071 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

72 F.3d 126
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert Lee BROCK, a/k/a Two Souls Walker, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
James T. WISE, Attorney at Law, Defendant--Appellee.

No. 95-7484.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 28, 1995.
Decided Dec. 15, 1995.

Robert Lee Brock, Appellant Pro Se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-95-733-CV-2)

Before WIDENER, HALL, 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. 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. Brock v. Wise, No. CA-95-733-CV-2 (E.D.Va. Sept. 18, 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

72 F.3d 126
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert Lee BROCK, a/k/a Two Souls Walker, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
James T. WISE, Attorney at Law, Defendant--Appellee.

No. 95-7484.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 28, 1995.
Decided Dec. 15, 1995.

Robert Lee Brock, Appellant Pro Se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-95-733-CV-2)

Before WIDENER, HALL, 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. 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. Brock v. Wise, No. CA-95-733-CV-2 (E.D.Va. Sept. 18, 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)

72 F.3d 126, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39539, 1995 WL 747071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-lee-brock-aka-two-souls-walker-v-james-t-wi-ca4-1995.