Garrett v. Ra Farmer Jr C

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Aug. 24, 1995. Decided Sept. 14, 1995.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Guo Chun Di v. Moscato

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2011

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Frank Lee Garrett, appellant pro se.

Jill Theresa Bowers, Office of the Atty. Gen. of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for appellees.

Before WIDENER, HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 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. Garrett v. Farmer, No. CA-95-200-R (W.D.Va. Apr. 24, 1995). 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.