Case Name: Earnestine SAUNDERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY OF PETERSBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; A.A. Mimms, Officer; W.B. Hinkle, Officer; J.H. Chabinak, MPO, and others who's names have been sealed and unknown to myself and others; City of Petersburg; J.K. Kuyendall, Officer of Prince George County Police Department; Pete Lucy, of Tri-City Wrecker Service, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-09-01
Citations: 108 F. App'x 102
Docket Number: No. 04-1713
Parties: Earnestine SAUNDERS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. The CITY OF PETERSBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; A.A. Mimms, Officer; W.B. Hinkle, Officer; J.H. Chabinak, MPO, and others who’s names have been sealed and unknown to myself and others; City of Petersburg; J.K. Kuyendall, Officer of Prince George County Police Department; Pete Lucy, of Tri-City Wrecker Service, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 108
Pages: 102–103

Head Matter:
Earnestine SAUNDERS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. The CITY OF PETERSBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; A.A. Mimms, Officer; W.B. Hinkle, Officer; J.H. Chabinak, MPO, and others who’s names have been sealed and unknown to myself and others; City of Petersburg; J.K. Kuyendall, Officer of Prince George County Police Department; Pete Lucy, of Tri-City Wrecker Service, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 04-1713.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 26, 2004.
Decided Sept. 1, 2004.
Earnestine Saunders, Appellant pro se. William C. Tucker, Harman, Claytor, Corrigan & Wellman, Glen Allen, Virginia; Robert A. Dybing, Thompson & McMullan, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Earnestine Saunders appeals the magistrate judge's order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Saunders v. City of Petersburg Police Dep't, No. CA-03-697-3 (E.D.Va. May 11, 2004). 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