Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

95 F.3d 42

Docket No. 96-6626.

Royal v. Hester

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Aug. 15, 1996. Decided Aug. 27, 1996.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-08-27

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Jihad v. Miro

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1996-08-27

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cynthia Ann Royal, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Lawrence Dumville, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant Cynthia Ann Royal appeals from the magistrate judge's* final judgment denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's final judgment and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Royal v. Hester, No. CA-95-554-3 (E.D.Va. Mar. 15, 1996). 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.

*

The parties consented to disposition by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (1988)

/95/f3d/42 · .json · Public domain