Christos D. Dedes; Christos D. Dedes, As Legal Custodian Ofhis Children Quincy Sophia Dedes and Dionysioschristos Dedes, Plaintiffs-appellants,andall Parents Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. John O'brion; Roswell Page; Murray J. Janus; Sylviaclute; Donald Lemons; Alfred Shilling; Daniel T. Balfour;melvin R. Hughes, Judge of the Circuit Court in the City Ofrichmond; Richard L. Williams, Judge of the United Statesdistrict Court for the Eastern District of Virginia,defendants-appellees,, 54 F.3d 772 (4th Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 54 F.3d 772 (4th Cir. 1995)

Submitted: April 20, 1995. Decided: May 19, 1995


Christos D. Dedes, Appellant Pro Se. John O'Brion, Cowan & Owen, Richmond, VA; James Watson Morris, III, Morris & Morris, Richmond, VA; Murray J. Janus, Bremner, Baber, & Janus, Richmond, VA; Sylvia Clute, Sylvia Clute & Associates, Richmond, VA; Donald Lemons, Durrette, Irvin, Lemons & Bradshaw, PC, Richmond, VA; Alfred Shilling, Richmond, VA; Daniel T. Balfour, Beale, Balfour, Davidson, Etherington & Parker, Richmond, VA; William Mark Dunn, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA; Robert William Jaspen, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:


Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying a petition for a writ of mandamus and the motion for reconsideration of that order. 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. Dedes v. Page, No. CA-94-186 (E.D. Va. Dec. 8 & 9, 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