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)
05-6303•Herschel Julius Perkins v. CARLTON DEWBERRY, Sergeant
05-6303Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 28, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6303
HERSCHEL JULIUS PERKINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CARLTON DEWBERRY, Sergeant; MICHAEL NEEBE,
Deputy; TIMOTHY HONIG, Deputy; ALEXANDRIA
SHERIFF'S OFFICE; JAMES H. DUNNING, Sheriff's
Office of Alexandria,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CA-03-1335-1)
Submitted: July 6, 2005 Decided: July 28, 2005
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Herschel Julius Perkins, Appellant Pro Se. Jack L. Gould, Fairfax,
Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Herschel Julius Perkins 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 because, even
accepting Perkins’ version of the disputed events, his injuries
were de minimis. While the district court did not address Perkins’
mental anguish claim, this claim is meritless because de minimis
physical injuries cannot support a claim for mental or emotional
injury. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e). 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.