Davis v. Chasse

Fourth Circuit

Davis v. Chasse

634 F. App'x 925

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 29, 2016

DocketNos. 15-2016, 15-2018, 15-2021, 15-2023, 15-2024, 15-2025, 15-2026, 15-2027, 15-2029, 15-2030, 15-2031, 15-2032, 15-2034, 15-2035, 15-2036, 15-2037, 15-2038, 15-2040, 15-2043, 15-2044, 15-2045, 15-2110

StatusPublished

This text of 634 F. App'x 925 (Davis v. Chasse) 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

Davis v. Chasse, 634 F. App'x 925 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, William Scott Davis, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion to reopen 22 closed civil cases. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Chasse, No. 4:11-cv-00020-RBS-DEM (E.D.Va. July 16, 2015). We deny Davis’ motions to remand and motions for appointment of counsel. 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

In these consolidated appeals, William Scott Davis, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion to reopen 22 closed civil cases. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Chasse, No. 4:11-cv-00020-RBS-DEM (E.D.Va. July 16, 2015). We deny Davis’ motions to remand and motions for appointment of counsel. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

634 F. App'x 925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-chasse-ca4-2016.