Lord Versatile v. Loretta Kelly, No. 12-6858 (4th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6858 LORD VERSATILE, a/k/a Venson Leon Coward, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LORETTA KELLY, Warden, Sussex I State Prison; A. F. MILLER, Operations Officer, Sussex I State Prison; L. RODRIGUES, Correctional Officer Sgt., Sussex I State Prison; G. DAVIS, Correctional Officer, Sussex I State Prison; H. MAVOR, Sgt., Hearing Officer, Sussex I State Prison; R. TUELL, Captain, Sussex I State Prison; A. DAVID ROBINSON, Regional Director, Eastern Office; GENE M. JOHNSON, Former Director, VDOC; R. W. SPROUSE, Intel-Officer, Sussex I State Prison; W. BROWN, IHO, Sussex I State Prison; K. FOWLKES, Former Unit Manager, Defendants - Appellees, and D. HUDSON, Grievance Coordinator, Sussex I State Prison; SHARON S. BURGESS, Regional Office Appeals Manager; MELISSA WELCH, Offender Discipline Unit Manager; JOHN M. JABE, Deputy Director, VDOC; T. FOWLKES, Unit Manager, Sussex I State Prison, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:11-cv-00308-HEH) Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012 Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lord Versatile, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Lord Versatile appeals the district court s order dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Versatile v. Kelly, No. 3:11-cv-00308-HEH (E.D. Va. Apr. 13, 2012). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED * On appeal, Versatile does not contest the district court s dismissal of two of his claims without prejudice to his right to refile the claims in new complaints. 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.