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)
04-7078•Darlene P. Lumpkin v. WILLIAM TORRES, Doctor
04-7078Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 9, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7078
DARLENE P. LUMPKIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM TORRES, Doctor,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
MISS FRYE, Nurse,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (CA-02-792-3)
Submitted: November 4, 2004 Decided: November 9, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darlene P. Lumpkin, Appellant Pro Se. Edward Joseph McNelis, III,
Coreen Antoinette Bromfield, John David McChesney, RAWLS & MCNELIS,
PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Darlene P. Lumpkin appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Lumpkin v. Torres, No. CA-02-792-3 (E.D. Va. May 28, 2004). 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.