# Graves v. Virginia Dept. of Corrections

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 27, 1991 · 927 F.2d 595

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/556845

## Case

- **Full name:** Thomas Graves v. Virginia Department of Corrections, Director Of, Virginia Department of Corrections, Deputy Of, State Board of Corrections, Chairman, Central Classification Board, Manager
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 27, 1991
- **Citations:** 927 F.2d 595; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 8066; 1991 WL 22901
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **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/556845

## Opinion text

927 F.2d 595
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Thomas GRAVES, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DIRECTOR OF, Virginia
Department of Corrections, Deputy of, State Board
of Corrections, Chairman, Central
Classification Board, Manager,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 90-6432.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 4, 1991.
Decided Feb. 27, 1991.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-90-474-R)
Thomas Graves, appellant pro se.
E.D.Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before DONALD RUSSELL, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
Thomas Graves seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 . Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Graves v. Virginia Dep't of Corrections, CA-90-474-R (E.D.Va. Nov. 7, 1990). 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.
2
AFFIRMED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/556845. Public record. Not legal advice.