Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/321204815/John-Pete-Perdue-Jr-v-B-L-Penalosa-Physician-Portsmouth-City-Jail-Zabo-Correction-Food-Service-Portsmouth-City-Jail-38-F-3d-1213-4th-Cir-19
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 22:51:43+00:00

Document:
John Pete Perdue, Jr., appellant pro se.
Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
order. We affirm the dismissal, but on other grounds.
claim for recovery against the Jail.
dismissed the case without prejudice.
drastic sanctions. Doyle v. Murray, 938 F.2d 33, 34 (4th Cir.1991).
Perdue is the degree of his personal responsibility for the failure to comply.
four factors weighed against plaintiff).
Commonwealth of Virginia entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. Will v.
secured by the Constitution or federal law precludes recovery under Sec. 1983.
Inmates v. Owens, 561 F.2d 560, 563 (4th Cir.1977).
any possible theory of recovery for Perdue. See Wilson v. Seiter, 59 U.S.L.W.
Perdue has no actionable claim against Zabo.
medical needs. Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 319 (1986); cf. Loe v.
performing X-rays did not rise to the level of inadequate medical treatment.
treatment, claims not actionable under Sec. 1983. Id. at 105-06; Russell v.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.