Adams v. Jones

Fourth Circuit

Adams v. Jones

170 F. App'x 827

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 14, 2006·No. No. 05-2231·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Adams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Adams v. Jones, No. CA-05-434-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 27, 2005; Nov. 1, 2005). We deny the motions for summary reversal, for discovery, and for sanctions. We also deny the motion for 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Adams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Adams v. Jones, No. CA-05-434-2 (E.D. Va. Oct. 27, 2005; Nov. 1, 2005). We deny the motions for summary reversal, for discovery, and for sanctions. We also deny the motion for 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

Adams v. Jones, 170 F. App'x 827 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

170 F. App'x 827 (Adams v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related