Case ID: f-appx_45/html/0254-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Thomas E. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard KETCHEM, Sheriff; Daniel McCarthy, Judge; Todd Riggleman; Monongahela Power Company, d/b/a Allegheny Power Company; Pamela Jo Swiger, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-1335.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 29, 2002.
    Decided Sept. 4, 2002.
    Thomas E. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. David Clayton Hook, Hook & Hook, Waynesburg, Pennsylvania; Michael Ko-zakewieh, Jr., Steptoe & Johnson, Clarks-burg, West Virginia; Jeffrey Alan Kimble, Robinson & McElwee, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellees; Pamela Jo Swiger, Appellee.
    Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Thomas E. Smith appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) 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. See Smith v. Ketchem, No. CA-01-176-1 (N.D.W.Va. Mar. 20, 2002). 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.