Court Opinion

ID: 578872
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-08-23 10:16:20+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:20.617702
License: Public Domain

958 F.2d 367
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.Billy Joe KING;  David Bright, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Richard LANHAM, Sr., Commissioner of Correction;  SewallSmith, Assistant Warden;  Bernard Smith, ActingWarden;  David Barthlow;  James Ashley;John Sandstrom, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 92-6113.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 2, 1992.Decided March 18, 1992.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.   Edward S. Northrop, Senior District Judge.  (CA-91-1789-N)
Billy Joe King, David Bright, Appellants Pro Se.
John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Audrey J.S. Carrion, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
D.Md.
AFFIRMED.
Before SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:

1
Billy Joe King and David Bright appeal from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988).   Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit.   Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.   King v. Lanham, No. CA-91-1789-N (D.Md. July 2, 1991 and Jan. 14, 1992).   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