Grasty v. Anderson

Fourth Circuit

Grasty v. Anderson

413 F. App'x 588

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 10, 2011·No. No. 10-1964·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Isaac T. Anderson and Christopher M. Hamilton appeal the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part summary judgment for the Appellants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Grasty v. Anderson, No. 7:09-cv-00471-SGW-PMS, 2010 WL 3219991 (W.D.Va. Aug. 13, 2010). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Isaac T. Anderson and Christopher M. Hamilton appeal the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part summary judgment for the Appellants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Grasty v. Anderson, No. 7:09-cv-00471-SGW-PMS, 2010 WL 3219991 (W.D.Va. Aug. 13, 2010). 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.

Grasty v. Anderson, 413 F. App'x 588 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

413 F. App'x 588 (Grasty v. Anderson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related