Drummond v. Bearden
This text of 475 F. App'x 924 (Drummond v. Bearden) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Randy Drummond appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint after entry of judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Drummond v. Ozmint, No. 8:10-cv02423-TLW (D.S.C. Apr. 17, 2012; Feb. 17, 2012); 2011 WL 6026305 (Dec. 5, 2011). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
475 F. App'x 924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drummond-v-bearden-ca4-2012.