Griffith v. Bird

Fourth Circuit

Griffith v. Bird

410 F. App'x 713

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 8, 2011·No. No. 09-8093·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Michael Griffith appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the rea[714]*714sons stated by the district court. Griffith v. Bird, No. 3:06-cv-00308-GCM, 2009 WL 3722804 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 3, 2009). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Joseph Michael Griffith appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the rea[714]*714sons stated by the district court. Griffith v. Bird, No. 3:06-cv-00308-GCM, 2009 WL 3722804 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 3, 2009). 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.

Griffith v. Bird, 410 F. App'x 713 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

410 F. App'x 713 (Griffith v. Bird) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related