Walter White v. Joyce Francis, Warden, No. 09-6318 (4th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6318 WALTER DUANE WHITE, Plaintiff Appellant, v. JOYCE FRANCIS, Warden; KAREN LAMBRIGHT, Assistant Health Service Administrator; VALORIE RAPPOLD, A. W. Operations; E. MACE, Doctor, Clinical Director; E. ANDERSON, F.C.I. Physician; MARK DIB, Physician Assistant; ELIZABETH MASTELLER-BORAM, Physician Assistant; R. SPEARS, Food Service Administrator; K. MCCORD, Religious Service Representative; I. BRANNON, Medical Records-Medical Trip Coordinator; CECIL NICHOLS, Associate Warden Programs, Defendants Appellees, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; BUREAU OF PRISONS, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (2:07-cv-00015-REM-JES) Submitted: April 26, 2010 Decided: May 17, 2010 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Walter Duane White, Appellant Pro Se. Rita R. Valdrini, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Walter Duane White appeals the district court s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny White s motion to appoint counsel and add a Defendant and affirm for the reasons stated by the district White v. Francis, No. 2:07-cv-00015-REM-JES (N.D. W. Va. court. Feb. 5, 2009). 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 3

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.