Dove v. City of Kinston

Fourth Circuit

Dove v. City of Kinston

61 F. App'x 101

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 17, 2003·No. No. 02-7797·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Dove appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Dove v. City of Kinston, No. CA-02-34-4H (E.D.N.C. Oct. 18, 2002). Because this opinion comports with Dove’s motion for a [102]*102written opinion, we grant that motion. 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.

Anthony Dove appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Dove v. City of Kinston, No. CA-02-34-4H (E.D.N.C. Oct. 18, 2002). Because this opinion comports with Dove’s motion for a [102]*102written opinion, we grant that motion. 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.

Dove v. City of Kinston, 61 F. App'x 101 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

61 F. App'x 101 (Dove v. City of Kinston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related