Case Name: Micheal Lee SPENCER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Belinda EASTER, LPN/BCC Nurse; Julia Lafoon, RN/BCC Nurse Supervisor; Ms. Israel, LPN/BCC Nurse; R.C. Walker, BCC Institution Investigator; Mrs. Harris, LPN/BCC Self-Medication Supervisor; S. Maclin; John Doe; Jane Doe, BCC Nurse/Pill Call, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-05-20
Citations: 63 F. App'x 160
Docket Number: No. 02-7722
Parties: Micheal Lee SPENCER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Belinda EASTER, LPN/BCC Nurse; Julia Lafoon, RN/BCC Nurse Supervisor; Ms. Israel, LPN/BCC Nurse; R.C. Walker, BCC Institution Investigator; Mrs. Harris, LPN/BCC Self-Medication Supervisor; S. Maclin; John Doe; Jane Doe, BCC Nurse/Pill Call, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 63
Pages: 160–160

Head Matter:
Micheal Lee SPENCER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Belinda EASTER, LPN/BCC Nurse; Julia Lafoon, RN/BCC Nurse Supervisor; Ms. Israel, LPN/BCC Nurse; R.C. Walker, BCC Institution Investigator; Mrs. Harris, LPN/BCC Self-Medication Supervisor; S. Maclin; John Doe; Jane Doe, BCC Nurse/Pill Call, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-7722.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 15, 2003.
Decided May 20, 2003.
Micheál Lee Spencer, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Eugene Ornoff, Ornoff & Arnold, P.C., Virginia Beach, VA; Philip Carlton Hollowell, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
PER CURIAM.
Micheál Lee Spencer, Sr., appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Spencer v. Easter, No. CA-01-1579-AM (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 24, 2002 & entered Oct. 25, 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.