Johnson v. Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Johnson v. Virginia

101 F. App'x 421

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 29, 2004

DocketNo. 04-1174

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 F. App'x 421 (Johnson v. Virginia) 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. Virginia, 101 F. App'x 421 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Lee Johnson and Veronica Moody Johnson appeal the district court’s order denying their motion for emergency injunctive relief and dismissing their civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Johnson v. Virginia, No. CA-04-66-2 (E.D.Va. Jan. 30, 2004). 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:

Christopher Lee Johnson and Veronica Moody Johnson appeal the district court’s order denying their motion for emergency injunctive relief and dismissing their civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Johnson v. Virginia, No. CA-04-66-2 (E.D.Va. Jan. 30, 2004). 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)

101 F. App'x 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-virginia-ca4-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack