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)
07-6177•Johnny R. Huff v. A. BASKERVILLE, Warden
07-6177Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 12, 2007
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6177
JOHNNY R. HUFF,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
A. BASKERVILLE, Warden; S. DAWKINS, Treatment
Program Supervisor,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate
Judge. (3:06-cv-00147-MHL)
Submitted: August 27, 2007 Decided: September 12, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Johnny R. Huff, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant
Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
*The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate
judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Johnny R. Huff appeals the magistrate judge’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
affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Huff v.
Baskerville, No. 3:06-cv-00147-MHL (E.D. Va. Jan. 24, 2007). 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.