Minns v. Simpson

Submitted Feb. 9, 1976. Decided April 1, 1976.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1976-04-01

2 counsel of record

Relies on Sweet v. South Carolina Department of Corrections · Interstate Commerce Commission and Alco-Gravure, Inc. v. The Baltimore and Annapolis Railroad Company, a Corporation, and Elmer J. Jubb, Interstate Commerce Commission and Alco-Gravure, Inc. v. The Baltimore and Annapolis Railroad Company, a Corporation, and Elmer J. Jubb, (Two Cases) · Minns v. Simpson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1976-04-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 1999

1 district · 2 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 →

Ernest George Minns, pro se.

Burnett Miller, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Richmond, Va., for appellee.

Before RUSSELL, FIELD and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

A review of the record and of the district court's opinion discloses that an appeal from the order of the district court denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 would be without merit. Accordingly, although leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, the judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons stated in its order. Minns v. Simpson, 391 F.Supp. 1156 (W.D.Va.1975). See also Sweet v. South Carolina Dept. of Corrections, 529 F.2d 854 (4th Cir., 1975).