Bryan v. Tatarsky

Fourth Circuit

Bryan v. Tatarsky

449 F. App'x 243

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 5, 2011·No. No. 11-6539·Published

Opinion

Affirmed in unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

T. Terell Bryan appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and granting Appellees’ motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bryan v. Tatarsky, No. 1:08-cv-03556-TLW, 2011 WL 380070 (D.S.C. Feb. 3, 2011). We also deny Bryan’s pending motion to produce. 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Affirmed in unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

T. Terell Bryan appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and granting Appellees’ motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bryan v. Tatarsky, No. 1:08-cv-03556-TLW, 2011 WL 380070 (D.S.C. Feb. 3, 2011). We also deny Bryan’s pending motion to produce. 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.

Bryan v. Tatarsky, 449 F. App'x 243 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

449 F. App'x 243 (Bryan v. Tatarsky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.