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)
10-6772•Clayton Brown v. R. C. MATHENA, Warden; OFFICER MITCHELL; SERGEANT SHRIEVE
10-6772Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 3, 2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6772
CLAYTON BROWN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
R. C. MATHENA, Warden; OFFICER MITCHELL; SERGEANT SHRIEVE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District
Judge. (7:10-cv-00192-sgw-mfu)
Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 3, 2010
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clayton Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Clayton Brown appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Brown v. Mathena, No. 7:10-cv-00192-sgw-mfu (W.D. Va.
May 14, 2010). 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.