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)
05-1805•Tammy R. Sabo v. STEVE CANTERBURY, Individually
05-1805Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit30.03.2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1805
TAMMY R. SABO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
STEVE CANTERBURY, Individually and in his
capacity as Director, West Virginia Regional
Jail and Correctional Facility Authority;
JAMIE SPENCER, Individually and in his
capacity as Warden; NORTHERN REGIONAL JAIL AND
CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; WEST VIRGINIA REGIONAL
JAIL AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITY AUTHORITY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-03-84)
Submitted: March 24, 2006 Decided: March 30, 2006
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Peter M. Suwak, Washington, Pennsylvania, for Appellant. David L.
Wyant, BAILEY & WYANT, P.L.L.C., Wheeling, West Virginia; Chad M.
Cardinal, WV REGIONAL JAIL & CORRECTIONAL FACILITY AUTHORITY,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Tammy R. Sabo appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment to the defendants on her claim of deliberate
indifference to her medical needs under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and on her
state law claims. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the
reasoning of the district court. See Sabo v. Canterbury, No.
5:03CV84 (N.D. W. Va. June 16, 2005). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.