Alexander Matthews v. Ted Hull

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:13-cv-00450-LO-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999385703]. Mailed to: Matthews. [14-6310]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-6310 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/30/2014 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6310 ALEXANDER OTIS MATTHEWS, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. TED HULL; R. MICHELLE LEWIS; MARTIN, Sergeant; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE RECREATION SUPERVISOR; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL SERVICES; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE CLEANING SUPERVISOR; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE FOOD SERVICES SUPERVISOR; JOHN DOE/JANE DOE UNIT NURSE; NORTHERN NECK REGIONAL JAIL BOARD AUTHORITY MEMBERS; LYNN SUDDUTH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00450-LO-JFA) Submitted: June 26, 2014 Decided: June 30, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Broderick Coleman Dunn, Alexander Francuzenko, COOK CRAIG & FRANCUZENKO, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-6310 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/30/2014 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Alexander Matthews appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). reversible error. We have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Matthews v. Hull, No. 1:13-cv-00450-LO- JFA (E.D. Va. Feb. 12, 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

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?