Garnet Vinson v. Richmond Police Dept., and Richmond Commonwealth Attorney, Etc.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
DONALD RUSSELL, Circuit Judge:
This is a pro se § 1983, 28 U.S.C., action. 1 The district court dismissed the action as barred by the applicable Virginia statute of limitation, as established by us in Almond v. Kent (4th Cir. 1972) 459 F.2d 200, 204, for § 1983 actions. On appeal we find it unnecessary to consider this ground, which is one of defense, 2 because it is clear on the face of the complaint itself that the cause of action as against the named defendants is without merit. We accordingly affirm the judgment for the defendants, but on grounds different from those assigned by the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Rizzo v. GoodeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- City of Kenosha v. BrunoSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- William Oscar Hampton v. Holmesburg Prison Officials. Appeal of Richard BurkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Post v. City of Fort LauderdaleDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1990
- Eddy v. City of MiamiDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1989
- Jacobs v. College of William and MaryDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1980
- Cribb v. PelhamDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1982
- Holden v. R. J. Reynolds Industries, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.