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)
02-2421•Terrence McCrady v. the Town of Wardensville
02-2421Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit12.02.2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2421
TERRENCE MCCRADY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE TOWN OF WARDENSVILLE; HARDY COUNTY;
WILLIAM D. MOOMAU; DONALD ROTRUCK; DAVID
WARREN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,
District Judge. (CA-02-23-3)
Submitted: February 6, 2003 Decided: February 12, 2003
Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrence McCrady, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Douglas Lorensen,
BOWLES, RICE, MCDAVID, GRAFF & LOVE, Martinsburg, West Virginia,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Terrence McCrady appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See McCrady
v. Town of Wardensville, No. CA-02-23-3 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 7, 2002).
We deny McCrady’s motion for oral argument and his motion to strike
Appellees’ informal brief. 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.