Corbett v. Branker

Fourth Circuit

Corbett v. Branker

508 F. App'x 226

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 30, 2013·No. No. 12-7543·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the defendants on his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corbett v. Branker, No. 5:10-ct-03137-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 6, 2012; Aug. 14, 2012). 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the defendants on his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Corbett v. Branker, No. 5:10-ct-03137-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 6, 2012; Aug. 14, 2012). 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.

Corbett v. Branker, 508 F. App'x 226 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

508 F. App'x 226 (Corbett v. Branker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related