Akinro v. King Castle Motel

Fourth Circuit

Akinro v. King Castle Motel

393 F. App'x 90

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 27, 2010·No. No. 10-1654·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Francis Akinro appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Akinro v. King Castle Motel, No. 1:10-cv-01405-RDB (D. Md. June 7, 2010). 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Francis Akinro appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Akinro v. King Castle Motel, No. 1:10-cv-01405-RDB (D. Md. June 7, 2010). 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.

Akinro v. King Castle Motel, 393 F. App'x 90 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

393 F. App'x 90 (Akinro v. King Castle Motel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.