Bolls v. Street

Fourth Circuit

Bolls v. Street

417 F. App'x 313

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 17, 2011·No. No. 10-2361·Published·Cited by 28 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Bolls appeals the district court’s orders dismissing Bolls’ complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bolls v. Street, No. 3:10-cv-00550-REP (E.D. Va. Nov. 5, 2010) & 2010 WL 5211481 (Dec. 16, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Jonathan Bolls appeals the district court’s orders dismissing Bolls’ complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bolls v. Street, No. 3:10-cv-00550-REP (E.D. Va. Nov. 5, 2010) & 2010 WL 5211481 (Dec. 16, 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.

Bolls v. Street, 417 F. App'x 313 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

417 F. App'x 313 (Bolls v. Street) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related