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)
14-7654•Bradley Maxwell v. David Robinson
14-7654Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 27, 2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7654
BRADLEY MAXWELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DAVID ROBINSON; GEORGE HINKLE; GREGORY HOLLOWAY; U. M.
SWINEY; DENNIS COLLINS; LT. KING; JOHN COMBS; TODD FARRIS;
IHO BURTON; C/O WRIGHT; C/O BELLAMY; ADINA POGUE; COUNSELOR
TREADWAY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:13-cv-00556-JLK-RSB)
Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bradley Maxwell, Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bradley Maxwell appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Maxwell v. Robinson, No. 7:13-cv-00556-JLK-RSB (W.D. Va.
Oct. 30, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.