Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

66 F.3d 315

Docket No. 95-6782.

Clark v. Carter

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted: Aug. 24, 1995. Decided: Sept. 15, 1995.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1995-09-15

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

Relies on Guo Chun Di v. Moscato

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1995-09-15

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Thomas Edward Clark, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WIDENER, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint and denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Clark v. Carter, No. CA-95-342-R (W.D.Va. Apr. 18, 1995; May 5, 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.

AFFIRMED

/66/f3d/315 · .json · Public domain