Jones v. Wal-Mart

Fourth Circuit

Jones v. Wal-Mart

473 F. App'x 333

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 30, 2012·No. No. 12-1301·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Marvin Kimble Jones appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil action under Fed. R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v) and 41(b) for failure to comply with Defendants’ discovery requests as ordered. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. Wal-Mart, No. 8:10-cv-00988-JMC, 2012 WL 684028 (D.S.C. Mar. 2, 2012). 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:

Marvin Kimble Jones appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil action under Fed. R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v) and 41(b) for failure to comply with Defendants’ discovery requests as ordered. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. Wal-Mart, No. 8:10-cv-00988-JMC, 2012 WL 684028 (D.S.C. Mar. 2, 2012). 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.

Jones v. Wal-Mart, 473 F. App'x 333 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

473 F. App'x 333 (Jones v. Wal-Mart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.