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)
02-1886•Karen Dishman Powell v. St. Paul Police Department
02-1886Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit30.10.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1886
KAREN DISHMAN POWELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ST. PAUL POLICE DEPARTMENT; ALLEN PORTER;
GEORGE ROBINSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. Glen M. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-01-27-2)
Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Karen Dishman Powell, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Roger Thiessen, PENN,
STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Karen Dishman Powell appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) 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. Powell v. St. Paul Police Dep’t, No. CA-01-27-2
(W.D. Va. July 23, 2002). 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.