Court Opinion

ID: 9899899
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-17 21:00:32.25414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:53.880871
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7317       Doc: 22        Filed: 11/16/2023     Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-7317

        LAMAR DORSEY,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        SGT. BOLEN, Correctional Officer; JOHN DOE,

                             Defendants – Appellees,

                      and

        WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,

                             Defendant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
        Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, Chief District Judge. (2:21-cv-00222)

        Submitted: October 31, 2023                                  Decided: November 16, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Lamar Nashawn Dorsey, Appellant Pro Se. John P. Fuller, Suleiman O. Oko-ogua,
        BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7317      Doc: 22         Filed: 11/16/2023    Pg: 2 of 3

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7317      Doc: 22         Filed: 11/16/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Lamar Dorsey appeals the district court’s order entering judgment in favor of

        Defendants following a jury trial on Dorsey’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have reviewed

        the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.

        Dorsey v. Bolen, No. 2:21-cv-00222 (S.D.W. Va. Oct. 19, 2022). 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

                                                    3