Grethen v. Clarke

Fourth Circuit

Grethen v. Clarke

672 F. App'x 300

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 2017

DocketNo. 16-6206

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 672 F. App'x 300 (Grethen v. Clarke) 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

Grethen v. Clarke, 672 F. App'x 300 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mark A. Grethen appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions for the appointment of counsel, granting a motion for sanctions and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Grethen v. Clarke, No. 2:13-cv-00416-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2015 & Feb. 11, 2016). We deny Grethen’s motion for the appointment of counsel as well as his motions for a transfer to Augusta Correctional Center and his motion regarding the storage of his legal materials. 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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mark A. Grethen appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions for the appointment of counsel, granting a motion for sanctions and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint, and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Grethen v. Clarke, No. 2:13-cv-00416-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2015 & Feb. 11, 2016). We deny Grethen’s motion for the appointment of counsel as well as his motions for a transfer to Augusta Correctional Center and his motion regarding the storage of his legal materials. 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)

672 F. App'x 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grethen-v-clarke-ca4-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack