Dyches v. Martin

Fourth Circuit

Dyches v. Martin

579 F. App'x 162

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 28, 2014

DocketNo. 14-6478

StatusPublished

This text of 579 F. App'x 162 (Dyches v. Martin) 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

Dyches v. Martin, 579 F. App'x 162 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lennell Dyches appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant the Defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Dyches v. Martin, No. 1:12-cv-02838-SB, 2014 WL 1093133 (D.S.C. March 17, 2014). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Lennell Dyches appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant the Defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Dyches v. Martin, No. 1:12-cv-02838-SB, 2014 WL 1093133 (D.S.C. March 17, 2014). 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)

579 F. App'x 162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dyches-v-martin-ca4-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack