Hugh Bernard Hamill, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Department of Corrections, State of Virginia; Charlesswecker; J. D. Terry, Defendants-appellees, 978 F.2d 1255 (4th Cir. 1992)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, District Judge. (CA-92-279)
Hugh Bernard Hamill, Appellant Pro Se.
Karen Lynn Lebo, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia; Frances Merrimon Burwell, Wooten & Hart, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.
W.D. Va.
Affirmed.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Hugh Bernard Hamill appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hamill v. Department of Corrections, No. CA-92-279 (W.D. Va. July 16, 1992). 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
