Davis v. Perdue

Fourth Circuit

Davis v. Perdue

808 F.3d 650, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21962, 2015 WL 9205653

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 17, 2015·No. No. 15-1842·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Scott Davis, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to reopen. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Perdue, No. 5:12-cv-00593-FL (E.D.N.C. July 2, 2015). We deny Davis’ motion for recusal. 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

William Scott Davis, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to reopen. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Perdue, No. 5:12-cv-00593-FL (E.D.N.C. July 2, 2015). We deny Davis’ motion for recusal. 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

Davis v. Perdue, 808 F.3d 650, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21962, 2015 WL 9205653 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

808 F.3d 650 (Davis v. Perdue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.