Eddie Milton Garey, Jr. v. Andrew Mansukeani

Fourth Circuit

Eddie Milton Garey, Jr. v. Andrew Mansukeani

654 F. App'x 638

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 22, 2016

Docket16-6634

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 654 F. App'x 638 (Eddie Milton Garey, Jr. v. Andrew Mansukeani) 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

Eddie Milton Garey, Jr. v. Andrew Mansukeani, 654 F. App'x 638 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eddie Milton Garey, Jr., a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice * his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition and the court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Garey v. Mansukeani, No. 8:15-cv-00056-BHH (D.S.C. Jan. 7, 2016; Apr. 19, 2016). We grant Garey’s motion for an extension of time to file his supplemental informal brief, and we deny Garey’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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

*

We conclude that the district court’s dismissal order is a final, appealable order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24, 629-30 (4th Cir. 2015).

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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Eddie Milton Garey, Jr., a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice * his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition and the court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Garey v. Mansukeani, No. 8:15-cv-00056-BHH (D.S.C. Jan. 7, 2016; Apr. 19, 2016). We grant Garey’s motion for an extension of time to file his supplemental informal brief, and we deny Garey’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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

*

We conclude that the district court’s dismissal order is a final, appealable order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24, 629-30 (4th Cir. 2015).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

654 F. App'x 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eddie-milton-garey-jr-v-andrew-mansukeani-ca4-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack