The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-7508•Lacy Davis, Iii v. Unknown Sheriff of Alexandria City Detention Center, all in their individual capacities
02-7508Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 6, 2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7508
LACY DAVIS, III,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
UNKNOWN SHERIFF OF ALEXANDRIA CITY DETENTION
CENTER, all in their individual capacities;
UNKNOWN DEPUTY OFFICERS OF ALEXANDRIA CITY
DETENTION CENTER, all in their individual
capacities,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
Judge. (CA-02-680-2)
Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: January 6, 2003
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lacy Davis, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Lacy Davis appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failure to state a claim
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000) and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Davis v. Unknown Sheriff of Alexandria City Detention
Ctr., No. CA-02-680-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 4, 2002; Sept. 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.