Arthur Treadwell, Plaintiff Appellant, v. Dr. Harris; Edward W. Murray, Director, Defendants Appellees, 39 F.3d 1178 (4th Cir. 1994)
Annotate this CaseArthur Treadwell, Appellant Pro Se. William Scott Johnson, CREWS & HANCOCK, Richmond, Virginia; Karen Lynn Lebo, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Treadwell v. Harris, No. CA-93-19 (E. D. Va. Jan. 14, 1994). 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.
