William D. Little v. William D. McLester M.D. H. A. Rosenfield

Fourth Circuit

William D. Little v. William D. McLester M.D. H. A. Rosenfield

37 F.3d 1494, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34836, 1994 WL 545122

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 6, 1994

Docket93-6956

StatusPublished

This text of 37 F.3d 1494 (William D. Little v. William D. McLester M.D. H. A. Rosenfield) 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

William D. Little v. William D. McLester M.D. H. A. Rosenfield, 37 F.3d 1494, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34836, 1994 WL 545122 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

37 F.3d 1494
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William D. LITTLE, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
William D. MCLESTER, M.D.; H. A. Rosenfield, Defendants Appellees.

No. 93-6956.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 19, 1993
Decided: October 6, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-93-492-CRT-H)

William D. Little, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, 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 affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Little v. McLester, No. CA-93-492-CRT-H (E.D.N.C. Aug. 30, 1993). 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

37 F.3d 1494
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William D. LITTLE, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
William D. MCLESTER, M.D.; H. A. Rosenfield, Defendants Appellees.

No. 93-6956.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 19, 1993
Decided: October 6, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-93-492-CRT-H)

William D. Little, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, 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 affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Little v. McLester, No. CA-93-492-CRT-H (E.D.N.C. Aug. 30, 1993). 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)

37 F.3d 1494, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 34836, 1994 WL 545122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-d-little-v-william-d-mclester-md-h-a-rosen-ca4-1994.