Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13 views

    Carl T. Banks v. Lieutenant Wigfield Lieutenant Sowers Lieutenant Barr Lieutenant Houch, 902 F.2d 1564, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1990 regarding a Section 1983 civil rights claim brought by Carl T. Banks against several prison officials. The district court denied relief to Banks. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court relied on the reasoning of the district court in making its decision to affirm.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Carl T. Banks v. Lieutenant Wigfield Lieutenant Sowers Lieutenant Barr Lieutenant Houch, 902 F.2d 1564, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    13 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1990 regarding a Section 1983 civil rights claim brought by Carl T. Banks against several prison officials. The district court denied relief to Banks. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court relied on the reasoning of the district court in making its decision to affirm.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1990-04-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 902 F.2d 1564 Docket: 89-7862

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1990 regarding a Section 1983 civil rights claim brought by Carl T. Banks against several prison officials. The district court denied relief to Banks. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court relied on the reasoning of the district court in making its decision to affirm.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    13 views2 pages

    Carl T. Banks v. Lieutenant Wigfield Lieutenant Sowers Lieutenant Barr Lieutenant Houch, 902 F.2d 1564, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1990 regarding a Section 1983 civil rights claim brought by Carl T. Banks against several prison officials. The district court denied relief to Banks. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court relied on the reasoning of the district court in making its decision to affirm.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    902 F.

    2d 1564
    Unpublished Disposition

    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.
    Carl T. BANKS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Lieutenant WIGFIELD; Lieutenant Sowers; Lieutenant Barr;
    Lieutenant Houch, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 89-7862.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Feb. 20, 1990.
    Decided April 26, 1990.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Paul V. Niemeyer, District Judge. (C/A No. 87-2943-PN)
    Carl T. Banks, appellant pro se.
    Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore,
    Md., for Appellee.
    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Carl T. Banks appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42
    U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is

    without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.


    Banks v. Wigfield, C/A No. 87-2943-PN (D.Md. Nov. 20, 1989). 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.
    2

    AFFIRMED.

    You might also like