Brown v. Massengill
This text of 425 F. App'x 254 (Brown v. Massengill) 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.
Opinion
Vincent Brown appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have [255]*255reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Brown v. Massengill, No. 1:10-cv-00385-LMBJFA (E.D.Va. Feb. 16, 2011). We deny Brown’s motions for appointment of counsel, for a transcript at Government expense, and for reconsideration of the initial deferral of those motions. 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
425 F. App'x 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-massengill-ca4-2011.