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)
07-6049•Edward James Egan, Sr v. DAVID ROBINSON, Warden
07-6049Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 6, 2007
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6049
EDWARD JAMES EGAN, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DAVID ROBINSON, Warden; COUNSELOR CARUSO; GENE
JOHNSON; DOCTOR THOMPSON; COUNSELOR DREWERY;
PAGE TRUE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.
(7:06-cv-00338-GEC)
Submitted: May 31, 2007 Decided: June 6, 2007
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward James Egan, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia;
Susan A. Waddell, GUYNN, MEMMER & DILLON, PC, Roanoke, Virginia,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Edward James Egan, Sr., 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 modify the dismissal of the action to be without
prejudice and affirm as modified for the reasons stated by the
district court. Egan v. Robinson, No. 7:06-cv-00338-GEC (W.D. Va.
Dec. 21, 2006). 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 AS MODIFIED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.