Johnson v. Medford

Fourth Circuit

Johnson v. Medford

37 F. App'x 622

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 7, 2002·No. No. 02-6415·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Wayne Thomas Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. Medford, No. CA-02-1-1-MU (W.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2002). 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.

Wayne Thomas Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. Medford, No. CA-02-1-1-MU (W.D.N.C. Feb. 26, 2002). 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.

Johnson v. Medford, 37 F. App'x 622 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

37 F. App'x 622 (Johnson v. Medford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related