Robert Lee Brown v. Division of Social Services, City of Lynchburg, Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Robert Lee Brown v. Division of Social Services, City of Lynchburg, Virginia

74 F.3d 1230, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39011, 1996 WL 26827

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 24, 1996·No. 95-2022·Published

Opinion

74 F.3d 1230
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 BROWN, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES, City of Lynchburg, Virginia,
Defendant--Appellee.

No. 95-2022.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 1995
Decided Jan. 24, 1996

Robert Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Phillip Richard Lingafelt, Glenn, Flippin, Feldmann & Darby, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the magistrate judge's order* denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Brown v. Division of Social Servs., No. CA-94-68-L (W.D.Va. May 15, 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

*

Judgment was entered by the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. Sec. 636(c) (West 1993)

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

74 F.3d 1230
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 BROWN, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES, City of Lynchburg, Virginia,
Defendant--Appellee.

No. 95-2022.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 1995
Decided Jan. 24, 1996

Robert Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Phillip Richard Lingafelt, Glenn, Flippin, Feldmann & Darby, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the magistrate judge's order* denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Brown v. Division of Social Servs., No. CA-94-68-L (W.D.Va. May 15, 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

*

Judgment was entered by the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. Sec. 636(c) (West 1993)

Robert Lee Brown v. Division of Social Services, City of Lynchburg, Virginia, 74 F.3d 1230, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39011, 1996 WL 26827 (4th Cir. 1996).

Pincite

74 F.3d 1230 (Robert Lee Brown v. Division of Social Services, City of Lynchburg, Virginia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.