Meyers v. Large et al, No. 7:2017cv00024 - Document 12 (W.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief United States District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 2/8/2017. (tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
O mn soF I u. as J x' FcE s mcouW ' A q A o ,h T oNl v ' Fu l Eo I TH E UM TED STATES DI N STRI COURT CT FO R TH E W E STER N D I STRI T O F V I G I A C R NI ROANOKE DI SI VI ON FEB 22 2 1 27 J A 'D D ULI , BY: , g , ANTH ONY M EYERS, CASE NO . 1 7: 7CV00024 Pl ntf , ai if V. M E M O M N D U M O PI I N N O KRYSTAL LARGE, AL. c , By: G l E.C onrad en C hi U nied Stat D i t ctJudge ef t es s ri De e f ndants. t) Ant hony M e s a Vigi ai t pr e ng pr K ,fl d t s cvi rgh saci n unde yer , r ni nma e oc edi o ie hi i l i t to r . 4 U. C.j 1 8 ,algn t a a n ls p a t ine a te j i wh r h i c n ie i n t 2 S. 9 3 l ig h t t e r ci o r t h al ee e s o fn d s o e r t pr di hi a qua e m edi alc r . The c e ha no ye be s r d on t def nda s and ovi ng m de t c ae as s t t en e ve he e nt , by s pa a e or r t co twildiec M e r t fl a a e d c e r t de , he ur l r t ye s o ie n m nde ompl i m n ng a c e ra ant ki l a nd pa tc a i e sa e e toft cai shewihest ptr ue a i tea h de e nt On Fe ' r riulrz d t t m n he l m s o ls ga ns c f nda . bl y ua 7,201 howe r t cour r c ve a lte i whi h M e r c m pl i t the i i g ea pan 7, ve , he t e ei d e tr n c ye s o ans ha sn r t i a d s e i dae c u ta ssa c ( No 1 ) Th c u tc nsr e ti s b sin a a n e ks mme it o r sitn e ECF . 1. e o r o tu s h s u miso s mo inf ritro u o yij nci rle t tmu tb d n e to o n elc t r nu t eif ha s e e id. ve M e r saes t the ha bee s f rng E ie a e m e c is s'snc he wa frt ye s t t ha s n ufe i t s r bl m dial s ue ' i e s is ic r eae a t e < ufi l J i'i M ac 7,2 6 1 ( te 1 ECF No 1 . l hs n a c rtd t h & fed al n rh D ' 01 . Letr , . 1) n i s isons hei c e t tove t l tm e snc hi a va ,hehass n doc or a anur e ubm s i , ndiats ha r weve i s i e s ni l ee t s nd s pr c ii r he ha be n pr de a i o i ,a he ha unde gone t ss buthi çis i sil a ttone , s e ovi d ntbi tcs nd s r e t, s Gs ue s tl Meyers v. Large et al Doc. 12 pr e sng a getngwore. Pan i a 1 1 /G '. (d. He saest thi motonsas ngt ogrsi nd ti s i s - 0t10' I ) tt ha s i ki o s e a o ti e d co o s e il th v b e u u c sf la d ta tej i' me ia safi e n u sd o tr r p cai a e e n ns c e su n h t h als d c l tf s s 1 I a copy ofa J n anuar 23, 201 j i r q s f n, ye ssae t t ha wa G lc d o a y 7,al e uet on Me r tts ha he s s E a e n p pr tt te t n l lnli No 201 by KRYSTAL LARGE NP, b ha no be n b c t s e he osae r ame t pa n v. 6 ' ut s t e a k o e r ' snc t n.( No. ) I r s ons ,aj i c p ansae : C wilne d t s a wih me iala t i e he ECF 9. n e p e al a t i tt s G You l e o pe k t dc bou yo st ain s i ma be pr pe l a drs e ' (#- M e r do no sae wheh r h t r a tr ur iu to o t y o ry d e s d. J , ' ) ye s es t tt t e e hee fe f lwe a prpraejipo e rst se dfee tme ia c r. olo d p o it al rc due o ek ifrn dc l ae Dockets.Justia.com a r t thsl e lh i veymu h i j L q a d (n h s is ei g tigwo s a af s rt . wae ha i G at s r c n eo p r y a d iq su s et h n re t a t ae' ' (d) M e e ssae : G ud t c u tp e s a ss me i g ti i dae a d a p o rae I . y r tts û l he o r la e sit n et mme it n p r p it co ng me ia atn ina s o a po sbl?'(d 2) dc l te to s o n s si e ' I . . Th pat s e i ap ei n r ij n to mus ma eace rs o n Gh thei l ey e ry e kng r l a y nu cin t k la h wig s a s i l mi t k t s c ed on t m e is he i lke y t s f r ir pa a e ha m i t abs nc ofpr lm i r o uc e he rt ; s i l o ufe re r bl r n he e e ei na y rle;t a t ebaa eo e uiistp i h sfvo ;a a ij n to i i tepu l itrs. eif h t h lnc f q te is n i a r nd n n u cin s n h bi n ee t' c ' W itrv Nau a Re . f Co n i.I . 5 5U..7 20( 0 ) S c itro u oy ij n tv n e . t rl s De . u cl nc, 5 S , 2 08 . u h ne lc tr n u cie r le i Ga e r r na y r med t t m a onl be a r d u n a c e r s ei f s tn xtao di r e y ha y y wa de po l a howi t t t ng ha he pli ifi e il t s h r le . I a 22. a ntf s ntted o uc e if' d. t ' Onl delbe ae i fe e e t al i ae' s rous medialne d vi at t Ei h y i r t ndif r nc o t nm t s e i c e ol es he ght Ame d n . Se Esel v. mbe 4 9U.. 7 1 2( 9 6 .A n reprci o ro oh rj i n me t e tle Ga l, 2 S 9 , 0 1 7 ) u s a tt ne r te al i saf p ro i G eie aey id fee t' i s e ç o o a d d se ad ( r rs n s tf es n s i l rtl n ifrn ' f h û ws f n ir g r s o epo d d b kn l e s bl t a e si rs t i t he lh ors ft ' Fn me v.Brnnan,511U. 825, mr a ona y o1 n xce sve ik o nmae at aey. r r e ' S. 8 7 ( 9 4 . The d lb rt id fee e sa d r ûs n ts tsid b ...mee d s g e me t 3 1 9) eieae n ifrnc tn a d G o aife y i r ia re n c n enig Gqueto so me ia j g n ,'Ge man v S e rn 5 F. p' 39 3 5 (t o c r n g l sin f d c l ud me t'' r i . h a i, 31 Ap x 2, 9 4 h Ci. 3 (uoi Rusel S ef r 5 8F.d31 , 9( t Ci.1 7 $, rme en g ie ei r 201 ) q tng s l v. h fe, 2 2 8 31 4h r 9 5 o r e lg nc n dignossorte t e .Esele, U . a 1 06. a i r am nt t l 429 S. t 05M e r ,i hi m o i n s ki i e l ut y r i ft o a n m e c c r ,f is t sa e ye s n s to ee ng nt roc or ele o bt i dial a e a l o t t f c sm e tng one oft f urr quied ee e s i t W i e c e. I i c e rt tM e r ha a t ei he o e r lm nt n he nt r as t s l a ha ye s s naton or be npr vi d e e i me c lc r durnghi c i me a t j l exam i i by doct s e o de xtnsve dia ae i s onfne nt t he ai: a t nur e pr c ii ne ,m e ca t s s a m edi a i H e be i vest tt c r pr de w a nd he s a tto r di l e t , nd c ton. le ha he a e ovi d s not c r t o wm i ufi i nt t a lvit hi uns ii d c ton o s orec r s ns fc e o le ae s pecfe ondii r ympt . Suc oms h alegai ns of ne i nt di gnos s or m e ca c r do no mee t r quied dei r t l to glge a e di l a e t t he e r lbe a e i fe e e sa r t sa e a c tmtona ca m a i ta ne Si lry,M e s be if ndif r nc t nda d o tt onsi i l li gans nyo . mia l yer ' le t thi c r ntco ton wa r nt r f ra t as cils i m e el adi a e m e wih t nur e ha s ure ndii ra s e e r l o pe a it s r y s gr e nt t he s p a tto rs me ia j d me ta u t p o e c u s o te t n f r li n e s S c r ciine' dc l u g n bo t he r p r o re f r ame t o l e d . u h s dia e m e sdo nots s gr e nt uppo ta sndi ofdei r t i fe e e. Ac r ngl M e r 'c r nt r ng lbe a e ndif r nc co di y, ye s ure al ga i do not s le tons how a lkelhood t the wils c d on t m e is of hi c tt tona i i ha l uc ee he rt s onsiu i l cai a ns t nure pr c iine ,one of t s wi he m us ma unde W i e t be l ms gai t he s a tto r he ho ngs t ke r nt r o e t ldt itro uo yij n tv r l f ni e o n el c t r n u cie ei . t e Be aus M e r t c c e ye s hus nnno m a t ne es a y,f -a t s t ke he c s r ourf c or howi t thi sm ai ng ha s i ton wa r nt i e l ut r r le ,t cou twilde hi m oton. An a opra eor rwilis tls ra s ntroc o y ei f he r l ny s i ppr i t de l s ue li da y. The Clr i d r c e t s nd c es of t s me or ndum opi on a a compa ng e k s ie t d o e opi hi m a ni nd c nyi or rt pli if de o antf . ENTER:Thi Q s d yo Fe nlr, 01 a f b ay 2 7. ChifUni d St t sDititJ e a e src udge
]]>
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.
