William T. Wohlford Mary Clare D. Wohlford v. Commonwealth of Virginia Virginia Department of Health Dwain H. Mays Malcolm Tenney, Jr., M.D. Bruce Hicks Robert J. Schutrumpf Donald Stern, M.D., M.P.H. C.M.G. Buttery, M.D.

Related Cases

Marie Assa'ad-Faltas, M.D., Mph v. Virginia Dept. Of Health, and Commonwealth of Virginia, Lancaster County and Its Board of Supervisors Richmond County and Its Board of Supervisors Westmoreland County and Its Board of Supervisors in Thier Political Institutional Capacities Gerald Baliles Mary Sue Terry Eva Tieg C.N.G. Buttery Robert Stroube Robert Swander Milan Hapala Thomas Jacks John Rupp Carole Nance H. Bruce Dendy, III Jeffers Schmidt, Jr. Margaret Robinson Anita Sanders Stephen Whiteway Eston Burge H. McDonald Rimple Lea Wilds Marjorie Reugger Sheila Spellman Ruth Jennette Victor Goodman Marily Carter Jane Flint Deborah King, in Their Official and Individual Capacities Richard Kauf Maurice Martin Rappahanock Medical Center and Mr. Dawson, and Other Unknown Named Persons, in Their Private Capacities
Norma R. Falin v. Donna Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services Larry Jackson, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Social Services
James P. Walters v. Commonwealth of Virginia Director, Virginia Department of Corrections L.M. Saunders Edward Carey, Doctor Doctor Baum, Dds Doctor Bigelow
Janet Doe v. James B. Kenley, M.D., Commissioner, State Board of Health, Individually and in His Official Capacity, Kenneth M. Haggerty, D.D.S., President, State Board of Health, Individually and in His Official Capacity, Fletcher J. Wright, Jr., M.D., Individually and in His Official Capacity, John H. Vanhoy, O.D., Individually and in His Official Capacity, William R. Hill, M.D., Individually and in His Official Capacity, A. Gibson Howell, Individually and in His Official Capacity, J. Curtis Nottingham, Individually and in His Official Capacity, Clarence W. Taylor, Jr., M.D., Individually and in His Official Capacity, Brig. Gen. James M. Morgan, Jr., Individually and in His Official Capacity, Fostine G. Riddick, Rn, Ma, Individually and in Her Official Capacity, Virginia State Board of Health, John N. Dalton, Governor of Virginia, Official and Individual Capacity, Vincent Pross, Acting Comptroller, Official Capacity, American Civil Liberties Union and the Virginia Civil Liberties Union, Amici Curiae
Walter R. Thompson, Jr. v. John R. Newhart, Sheriff of the Chesapeake Sheriff's Department Earl G. Foster, Physician's Assistant and Deputy, Chesapeake City Jail J. Glover, Physician's Assistant and Deputy, Chesapeake City Jail Noah Byrum, Colonel, Chesapeake Sheriff's Department James Crosby, Dr., and L. Douglas Wilder, Governor of Virginia

53 F.3d 330
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.

William T. WOHLFORD; Mary Clare D. Wohlford, Plaintiffs--Appellants,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; Virginia Department of Health;
Dwain H. Mays; Malcolm Tenney, Jr., M.D.; Bruce Hicks;
Robert J. Schutrumpf; Donald Stern, M.D., M.P.H.; C.M.G.
Buttery, M.D., Defendants--Appellees.

No. 94-1719.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 20, 1995.
Decided May 10, 1995.

William T. Wohlford, Mary Clare D. Wohlford, Appellants Pro Se. Karen Lynn Lebo, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying Appellant's motion for reconsideration and denying Appellant's motion for reconsideration of that order. 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. Wohlford v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. CA-88-112-A (W.D.Va. May 19, 1994). 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