Costello v. Johnson

Fourth Circuit

Costello v. Johnson

470 F. App'x 102

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 2, 2012

DocketNo. 11-2234

StatusPublished

This text of 470 F. App'x 102 (Costello v. Johnson) 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

Costello v. Johnson, 470 F. App'x 102 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Linda Costello appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her complaint asserting claims under the Fair [103]*103Housing Act and for battery. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Costello v. Johnson, No. 3:ll-cv-00198-JRS, 2011 WL 3820890 (E.D.Va. Aug. 29, 2011). 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:

Linda Costello appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her complaint asserting claims under the Fair [103]*103Housing Act and for battery. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Costello v. Johnson, No. 3:ll-cv-00198-JRS, 2011 WL 3820890 (E.D.Va. Aug. 29, 2011). 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)

470 F. App'x 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/costello-v-johnson-ca4-2012.