William Washington, Sr. v. Robert Brown, Dr. Irvin, Dr. Rao, R. Redman, Assistant Warden Cross, R.N.A.C. Pugh, & R.N. Budzinski, 842 F.2d 334 (6th Cir. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
William Washington, Sr. v. Robert Brown, Dr. Irvin, Dr. Rao, R. Redman, Assistant Warden Cross, R.N.A.C. Pugh, & R.N. Budzinski, 842 F.2d 334 (6th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Truck Drivers Local No. 164 v. Allied Waste Systems, Inc. (ca6, 2008-01-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Truck Drivers Local No. 164 v. Allied Waste Systems, Inc.
6th Cir. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Yamaha Int’l Corp. v. United Furniture Workers of America, 842 F.2d 334 , 1988 WL 23685, at *1 (6th Cir.l988)(unpublished).
cited Cited "see" Truck Drivers L164 v. Allied Waste Sys
6th Cir. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Yamaha Int’l Corp. v. United Furniture Workers of America, 842 F.2d 334 , *1(6th Cir. 1988)(unpublished).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
William Washington, Sr.
v.
Robert Brown, Dr. Irvin, Dr. Rao, R. Redman, Assistant Warden Cross, R.N.A.C. Pugh, and R.N. Budzinski
87-1764.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Mar 22, 1988.
842 F.2d 334
Unpublished

842 F.2d 334

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
William WASHINGTON, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Robert BROWN, Dr. Irvin, Dr. Rao, R. Redman, Assistant
Warden Cross, R.N.A.C. Pugh, and R.N. Budzinski,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-1764.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 22, 1988.

1

Before MILBURN and BOGGS, Circuit Judges and ALDRICH, District Judge.[*]

ORDER

2

Plaintiff appeals the district court's judgment dismissing his civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The appeal has been referred to a panel pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the certified record and the parties' briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

3

Plaintiff claimed that defendants' inadequate medical treatment amounted to deliberate indifference and cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment.

4

Upon consideration, we conclude that plaintiff's failure to file any objections to the magistrate's report and recommendation constituted a waiver of his right to appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir.1987); Wright v. Holbrook, 794 F.2d 1152 (6th Cir.1986); Wilson v. McMacken, 786 F.2d 216 (6th Cir.1986).

5

The district court's judgment is accordingly affirmed. Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

*

The Honorable Ann Aldrich, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation