Donohue v. Hinkle

Fourth Circuit

Donohue v. Hinkle

585 F. App'x 266

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 25, 2014·No. No. 14-6905·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Donohue appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Donohue v. Hinkle, No. 7:14-cv-00138-GEC-RSB (W.D.Va. May 15, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented [267] 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

John Donohue appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Donohue v. Hinkle, No. 7:14-cv-00138-GEC-RSB (W.D.Va. May 15, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented [267] in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Donohue v. Hinkle, 585 F. App'x 266 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

585 F. App'x 266 (Donohue v. Hinkle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related