Arbor v. Ezell , 2 F. App'x 348 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 00-7314
    DARRIN G. ARBOR,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MRS. EZELL, Food Service Supervisor; ETHEL
    LANKFORD, Food Service Manager; J. CAPPS,
    Grievance Coordinator; A. TILLERY, Grievance
    Coordinator; M. J. WILKERSON, Regional Direc-
    tor; RUFUS FLEMING, Deputy Director; MARYLAND
    POPE, Food Service Director; GREENSVILLE COR-
    RECTIONAL FOOD SERVICE DEPARTMENT,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
    trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge.
    (CA-99-905-AM)
    Submitted:   January 18, 2001             Decided:   January 25, 2001
    Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Darrin G. Arbor, Appellant Pro Se. Banci Enga Tewolde, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Darrin G. Arbor appeals the district court’s order denying
    relief on his 
    42 U.S.C.A. § 1983
     (West Supp. 2000) complaint.   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.    Arbor v. Ezell, No. CA-99-905-AM (E.D. Va.
    Aug. 23, 2000).*   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
    *
    Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
    August 21, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was
    entered on the docket sheet on August 23, 2000. Pursuant to Rules
    58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
    date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as
    the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v.
    Murray, 
    806 F.2d 1232
    , 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-7314

Citation Numbers: 2 F. App'x 348

Judges: Hamilton, Michael, Per Curiam, Widener

Filed Date: 1/25/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023