Carroll v. Reese

414 F. App'x 518
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 2, 2011·No. No. 10-7245·Published·Cited by 24 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ernest Lee Carroll appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Carroll v. Reese, No. 9:09-cv-00199-PMD, 2010 WL 3399888 (D.S.C. Aug. 25, 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

Carroll v. Reese, 414 F. App'x 518 (4th Cir. 2011).

414 F. App'x 518 (Carroll v. Reese) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Kijakazi
E.D. Virginia, 2024
Tyson v. O'Malley
E.D. Virginia, 2024
Lucas v. O'Malley
E.D. Virginia, 2024
United States v. Wilkinson
E.D. Virginia, 2023
Regassa v. Dunbar
D. South Carolina, 2023
Hite v. Kijakazi
E.D. Virginia, 2023
Coffey v. Kijakazi
E.D. Virginia, 2022
Robinson v. Kijakazi
E.D. Virginia, 2022
Malicki v. Kijakazi
E.D. Virginia, 2022
Nichols v. Colvin
100 F. Supp. 3d 487 (E.D. Virginia, 2015)