Brisbon v. Owens

Fourth Circuit

Brisbon v. Owens

627 F. App'x 252

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 31, 2015

DocketNo. 15-7037

StatusPublished

This text of 627 F. App'x 252 (Brisbon v. Owens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brisbon v. Owens, 627 F. App'x 252 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed as modified by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Omeako L. Brisbon appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2012). We'have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. However, under the circumstances of this ease, we conclude that the district court should have dismissed Brisbon’s complaint without prejudice, Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal order, with the modification that the dismissal is without prejudice. See Brisbon v. Owens, No. 5:14-ct-03282-H (E.D.N.C. June 24, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because, the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

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

Affirmed as modified by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Omeako L. Brisbon appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2012). We'have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. However, under the circumstances of this ease, we conclude that the district court should have dismissed Brisbon’s complaint without prejudice, Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal order, with the modification that the dismissal is without prejudice. See Brisbon v. Owens, No. 5:14-ct-03282-H (E.D.N.C. June 24, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because, the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

627 F. App'x 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brisbon-v-owens-ca4-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack