Armstrong v. Osteen

Fourth Circuit

Armstrong v. Osteen

3 F. App'x 106

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 13, 2001·No. 00-2519·Unpublished

Opinion

*107 PER CURIAM.

Arthur 0. Armstrong appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for leave to file a complaint. 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. Armstrong v. Osteen, No. MISC-00-108-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2000). 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

*107 PER CURIAM.

Arthur 0. Armstrong appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for leave to file a complaint. 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. Armstrong v. Osteen, No. MISC-00-108-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2000). 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.

Armstrong v. Osteen, 3 F. App'x 106 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

3 F. App'x 106 (Armstrong v. Osteen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.