David Conn v. Kenneth Stolle

Fourth Circuit

David Conn v. Kenneth Stolle

460 F. App'x 276

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 5, 2012·No. 11-7099·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding px-ecedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David William Conn appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Conn v. Stolle, Case No. 1:11-cv-00758-CMH-TCB, 2011 WL 3321136 (E.D.Va. Aug. 2, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and ai-gument 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding px-ecedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David William Conn appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Conn v. Stolle, Case No. 1:11-cv-00758-CMH-TCB, 2011 WL 3321136 (E.D.Va. Aug. 2, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and ai-gument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

David Conn v. Kenneth Stolle, 460 F. App'x 276 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

460 F. App'x 276 (David Conn v. Kenneth Stolle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related