Harvey Short v. Jennifer Bailey-Walker


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [998350813-2], denying Motion for other relief [998350808-2] Originating case number: 2:09-cv-01096 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998417207] [10-6559]

Download PDF
Harvey Short v. Jennifer Bailey-Walker Doc. 0 Case: 10-6559 Document: 15 Date Filed: 09/02/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6559 HARVEY PATRICK SHORT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JUDGE JENNIFER BAILEY-WALKER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (2:09-cv-01096) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 2, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harvey Patrick Short, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-6559 Document: 15 Date Filed: 09/02/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Harvey Patrick Short appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b) (2006). no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons Short v. Bailey-Walker, No. 2:09Short's motions for an stated by the district court. cv-01096 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 30, 2010). order compelling the state court to adjudicate his state habeas corpus petition and for an omnibus habeas corpus hearing are denied. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional contentions the court would process. AFFIRMED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?