# Brown v. Baskerville

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 20, 2001 · 22 F. App'x 171

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005918

## Case

- **Full name:** Lakeith Byron BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alton BASKERVILLE; G. Washington; E. Barksdale; T. Ray; S. Hill; A. Johnson; E. Graham; L. Cei; S. McNamara; R. Barlow; T. Neumayer; S v. Preutte; R. Hildebrand, Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 20, 2001
- **Citations:** 22 F. App'x 171
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Wilkins, Michael, King
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005918

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7459

LAKEITH BYRON BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ALTON BASKERVILLE; G. WASHINGTON; E. BARKS-
DALE; T. RAY; S. HILL; A. JOHNSON; E. GRAHAM;
L. CEI; S. MCNAMARA; R. BARLOW; T. NEUMAYER;
S. V. PREUTTE; R. HILDEBRAND,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CA-01-10)

Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 20, 2001

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lakeith Byorn Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Lakeith Byron Brown appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting

the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

Brown v. Baskerville, No. CA-01-10 (E.D. Va. June 28, 2001). 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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005918. Public record. Not legal advice.