Goodyear v. Catoe

Fourth Circuit

Goodyear v. Catoe

32 F. App'x 691

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 17, 2002

DocketNo. 01-7962

StatusPublished

This text of 32 F. App'x 691 (Goodyear v. Catoe) 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

Goodyear v. Catoe, 32 F. App'x 691 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Phillip Paul Goodyear appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Goodyear v. Catoe, CA-01-20-BD (D.S.C. filed Oct. 19, 2001; entered Oct. 22, 2001). 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.

Phillip Paul Goodyear appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and find no error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Goodyear v. Catoe, CA-01-20-BD (D.S.C. filed Oct. 19, 2001; entered Oct. 22, 2001). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 F. App'x 691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodyear-v-catoe-ca4-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack