Scribd
Upload
38 views1 page

Richard Kenneth Cox v. John B. Taylor, Warden Lou Dixon Marsha Altizer, 64 F.3d 656, 4th Cir. (1995)

The document is an appeals court decision from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the district court's denial of relief on Richard Cox's § 1983 civil rights complaint. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were clearly presented in the case materials.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
38 views1 page

Richard Kenneth Cox v. John B. Taylor, Warden Lou Dixon Marsha Altizer, 64 F.3d 656, 4th Cir. (1995)

The document is an appeals court decision from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the district court's denial of relief on Richard Cox's § 1983 civil rights complaint. The appeals court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were clearly presented in the case materials.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

64 F.

3d 656

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
Richard Kenneth COX, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
John B. TAYLOR, Warden; Lou Dixon; Marsha Altizer,
Defendants--Appellees.
No. 95-6737.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


Submitted July 25, 1995.
Decided Aug. 14, 1995.

Richard Kenneth Cox, appellant pro se.


W.D.Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district
court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. Cox v. Taylor, No. CA-95-382-R (W.D.Va. Apr.
24, 1995). 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.

You might also like