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)
22-7244•Nathaniel Howard Moone v. STEVE HERRICK, Director of Health Services of the Virginia Department of Corrections
22-7244Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 28, 2023
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-7244
NATHANIEL HOWARD MOONE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STEVE HERRICK, Director of Health Services of the Virginia Department of
Corrections; TREY FULLER, Content Owner of the Virginia Department of
Corrections “Assistant Health Service Director”; ROSS, Correctional Officer,
Buckingham Corrections; DR. PAUL OHAI, Physician, Buckingham Correctional
Center,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:21-cv-00472-JPJ-PMS)
Submitted: April 25, 2023 Decided: April 28, 2023
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathaniel Howard Moone, Appellant Pro Se. Rosalie Fessier, Brittany Elizabeth Shipley,
TIMBERLAKE SMITH, Staunton, Virginia, for Appellee Dr. Paul Ohai.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel Howard Moone appeals the district court’s order denying relief in his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action, asserting that Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his
serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.
Moone v. Herrick, No. 7:21-cv-00472-JPJ-PMS (W.D. Va. Sept. 29, 2022). 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.