Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
00-6373•Wayne T. McCray v. R. A. Young
00-6373Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit12.05.2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6373
WAYNE T. MCCRAY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
R. A. YOUNG; S. K. YOUNG, Chief Warden; MS.
JORDAN; G. BAILEY, Doctor; DR. WILSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
Judge. (CA-00-69-7)
Submitted: April 28, 2000 Decided: May 12, 2000
Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wayne T. McCray, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Wayne T. McCray appeals the district court’s orders denying
relief without prejudice on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.
1999) complaint and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to
alter or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See McCray v.
Young, No. CA-00-69-7 (W.D. Va. Feb. 7, 2000; Feb. 29, 2000). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.