Hoye v. Clarke

Fourth Circuit

Hoye v. Clarke

628 F. App'x 199

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 13, 2016·No. No. 15-7016·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[200]*200Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles T. Hoye appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hoye v. Clarke, No. 7:14-cv-00124-MFU, 2015 WL 3407609 (W.D.Va. May 27, 2015). 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

[200]*200Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles T. Hoye appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hoye v. Clarke, No. 7:14-cv-00124-MFU, 2015 WL 3407609 (W.D.Va. May 27, 2015). 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.

Hoye v. Clarke, 628 F. App'x 199 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

628 F. App'x 199 (Hoye v. Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related