Paul Thompson, Jr. v. Harold Clarke, No. 18-6696 (4th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6696 PAUL CLEVELAND THOMPSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of VDOC; GARY BASS, Regional Director of Operations for the Central Region of VDOC; L. F. SCHILLING, Health Services Director for VDOC Medical Services; J. E. PARKS, Director of Offender Management Services for VDOC; KEITH DAWKINS, Supervisor; GAIL JONES, working in VDOC offender management; H. PONTON, Warden; J. ROYSTER, Operations Manager; DIXON, M.D., Medical Director at NCC; L. HIGHTOWER, Supervisor of the NCC Medical Dept and the Nurses; E. L. WILLIS, Treatment Program Supervisor; D. BROCCHARD, Psychologist at NCC; MS. SARGENT, Mental Health Counselor; MS. LEFEVERS, Unit Manager; MR. MOICZEK, Institutional Investigator; A. JAMES, Grievance Coordinator; M. PUGH, Sgt., Supervisor of the NCC Property Office; J. TERRY, Counselor; MS. SPENCE, Counselor; JOSEPH TEEFEY, Institutional Attorney at NCC; A. BRYANT, Defendants - Appellees, and COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:15-cv-00439-RBS-DEM) Submitted: April 4, 2019 Decided: April 9, 2019 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul Cleveland Thompson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jeff W. Rosen, PENDER & COWARD, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee Dixon. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Paul Cleveland Thompson, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Thompson v. Clarke, No. 2:15-cv-00439-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. Mar. 10, 2017; May 9, 2018). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 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.