Anthony Atkins v. Ron Angelone, 91 F.3d 128 (4th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Anthony Atkins v. Ron Angelone, 91 F.3d 128 (4th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Sanders v. Farina (vaed, 2016-07-06)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Sanders v. Farina
E.D. Va. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bast v. Glasberg, 91 F.3d 128 , 1996 WL389482 (4th Cir.1996) (unpublished).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Moore v. Board of Educ. for Talbott County
D. Maryland · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Alexander v. Maryland Lottery Agency, 91 F.3d 128 , 1996 WL 386613, at *2 (4th Cir.1996)(noting question, but not deciding, whether a Maryland circuit court's dismissal of a petition for judicial review for procedural default renders the underlying findings of ALJ ''unreviewed” under Kremer and its progeny cited above).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anthony Atkins
v.
Ron Angelone
96-6296.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jul 31, 1996.
91 F.3d 128
Unpublished

91 F.3d 128

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Anthony ATKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Ron ANGELONE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 96-6296.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 23, 1996.
Decided: July 31, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-149-R)

Anthony Atkins, Appellant Pro Se.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint as frivolous. 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. Atkins v. Angelone, No. CA-96-149-R (W.D.Va. Feb. 14, 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.

AFFIRMED