# Kendrick v. Virginia Parole Bd.

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 17, 1992 · 976 F.2d 726

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/591563

## Case

- **Full name:** Daniel G. Kendrick v. Virginia Parole Board Clarence L. Jackson, Chairman Lewis W. Hurst, Vice Chairman Gail Y. Browne, Member Jacqueline F. Fraser, Member John A. Brown, Member
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 17, 1992
- **Citations:** 976 F.2d 726; 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 23216; 1992 WL 225854
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/591563

## Opinion text

976 F.2d 726
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Daniel G. KENDRICK, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD; Clarence L. Jackson, Chairman;
Lewis W. Hurst, Vice Chairman; Gail Y. Browne,
Member; Jacqueline F. Fraser, Member;
John A. Brown, Member,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 92-6241.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 1, 1992
Decided: Sept. 17, 1992
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, District Judge. (CA-91-588-R)
Daniel G. Kendrick, Appellant Pro Se.
Robert Harkness Herring, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
W.D. Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before SPROUSE, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
1
Daniel G. Kendrick appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Kendrick v. Virginia Parole Bd., No. CA-91-588-R (W.D. Va. Feb. 21, 1992). 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/591563. Public record. Not legal advice.