Corey v. Reich

Fourth Circuit

Corey v. Reich

103 F. App'x 753

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 3, 2004

DocketNo. 04-6492

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 103 F. App'x 753 (Corey v. Reich) 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

Corey v. Reich, 103 F. App'x 753 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Corey appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failure to state a constitutional violation. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Corey v. Reich, No. CA-02-2801 (D.S.C. Mar. 9, 2004). 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

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Corey appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failure to state a constitutional violation. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Corey v. Reich, No. CA-02-2801 (D.S.C. Mar. 9, 2004). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 F. App'x 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corey-v-reich-ca4-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack