Tobin v. Public Defender Corp.

45 F.3d 427, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 5859, 1995 WL 3842
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 6, 1995
Docket94-6613
StatusPublished

This text of 45 F.3d 427 (Tobin v. Public Defender Corp.) 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
Tobin v. Public Defender Corp., 45 F.3d 427, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 5859, 1995 WL 3842 (4th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

45 F.3d 427
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Gary TOBIN, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
PUBLIC DEFENDER CORPORATION; Jerry L. Detrick,
Administrator, Eastern Regional Jail; Nicholas Hunn,
Commissioner, Division of Corrections; Joseph J. Skaff,
Major General, Secretary, Division of Corrections,
Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6613.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 13, 1994.
Decided Jan. 6, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, District Judge. (CA-93-182-E)

Gary Tobin, appellant pro se.

Michael Kozakewich, Jr., Steptoe & Johnson, Clarksburg, WV; Chad M. Cardinal, Charleston, WV, for appellees.

N.D.W.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, 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. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Tobin v. Public Defender Corp., No. CA-93-182-E (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 14, 1994). 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.

DISMISSED

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 F.3d 427, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 5859, 1995 WL 3842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tobin-v-public-defender-corp-ca4-1995.