Harris v. Pressley

Fourth Circuit

Harris v. Pressley

446 F. App'x 567

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 15, 2011·No. No. 11-6564·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Lee Harris, II, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and its subsequent order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harris v. Pressley, No. 1:10-cv-00412-CCE-PTS (M.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2011; Apr. 15, 2011). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Lawrence Lee Harris, II, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and its subsequent order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harris v. Pressley, No. 1:10-cv-00412-CCE-PTS (M.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2011; Apr. 15, 2011). 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.

Harris v. Pressley, 446 F. App'x 567 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

446 F. App'x 567 (Harris v. Pressley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related