Frankie LordMaster v. G. Hinkle, No. 14-7074 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7074 FRANKIE JAE LORDMASTER, f/k/a Jason Robert Goldader, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. G. HINKLE, Regional Director; MR. JENNINGS, Ex-Warden of Augusta Correctional Center; BUILDING C/D SERGEANT; BUILDING C/D LIEUTENANT; LT. WHEELER; LINKENHOLKER; SHIFFLET, a/k/a Shiflett, Defendants Appellees, and AUGUSTA CORRECTIONAL CENTER PERSONNEL; UNKNOWN; VIRGINIA D.O.C. AGENTS; OTHER AGENTS OF GOVERNMENT; COMMON FARE: DEFENDANTS AT ACC; LAW LIBRARY: DEFENDANTS AT ACC; PERSONAL SAFETY: DEFENDANTS AT ACC PERSONNEL; DISEMMINATION: DEFENDANTS AT OR OUTSIDE ACC; RETALIATION: DEFENDANTS AT ACC, Cell Search or resultant; RETALIATION: DEFENDANTS AT OR OUTSIDE ACC, Transfer or resultants, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00506-MFU-RSB) Submitted: October 16, 2014 Decided: Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. October 22, 2014 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frankie Jae LordMaster, Appellant Pro Se. James Milburn Isaacs, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Frankie order granting Jae LordMaster summary appeals judgment to the district some court s Defendants on LordMaster s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint and dismissing without prejudice the claims against the remaining Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2012). the record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed Accordingly, we deny LordMaster s pending Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. LordMaster v. Hinkle, No. 7:13-cv-00506-MFU-RSB (W.D. Va. July 9, 2014). dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this 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.