Court Opinion

ID: 990434
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:21:17.216082+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:34:44.368296
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 96-6604

VERNON EGGLESTON,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

C. E. BURCH; F. R. POOLE; R. W. ARTHUR,

                                            Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District
Judge. (CA-95-881-R)

Submitted:   September 5, 1996         Decided:   September 17, 1996

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vernon Eggleston, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Ralph Davis, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) 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. Eggleston v. Burch, No. CA-95-881-R (W.D. Va. Mar. 29,
1996). 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

                                2