Johnson v. Dalton

Fourth Circuit

Johnson v. Dalton

470 F. App'x 212

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 3, 2012

DocketNo. 11-7623

StatusPublished

This text of 470 F. App'x 212 (Johnson v. Dalton) 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

Johnson v. Dalton, 470 F. App'x 212 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Lance M. Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. Dalton, No. 2:11-cv-00577-RAJ-FBS (E.D.Va. Nov. 7, 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

PER CURIAM:

Lance M. Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. Dalton, No. 2:11-cv-00577-RAJ-FBS (E.D.Va. Nov. 7, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

470 F. App'x 212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-dalton-ca4-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack