Borowski v. Polinske

Fourth Circuit

Borowski v. Polinske

415 F. App'x 478

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 9, 2011·No. No. 10-2107·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Matthew and Carianne Borowski appeal a district court’s order granting Detective Stephen D. Epple’s and Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Teresa Polinske’s motions to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failing to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Borowski v. Polinske, No. 1:10-cv-00197-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 24, 2010; entered Aug. 25, 2010). We deny the Borowskis’ 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:

Matthew and Carianne Borowski appeal a district court’s order granting Detective Stephen D. Epple’s and Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Teresa Polinske’s motions to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failing to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Borowski v. Polinske, No. 1:10-cv-00197-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 24, 2010; entered Aug. 25, 2010). We deny the Borowskis’ 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.

Borowski v. Polinske, 415 F. App'x 478 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

415 F. App'x 478 (Borowski v. Polinske) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.