Keck v. Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Keck v. Virginia

470 F. App'x 127

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 2, 2012

DocketNo. 11-2191

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 470 F. App'x 127 (Keck 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

Keck v. Virginia, 470 F. App'x 127 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Donald P. Keck, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny his several federal and state law claims against Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Keck v. Virginia, No. 3:10-cv-00555-REP-MHL, 2011 WL 4573473 (E.D.Va. Sept. 30, 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:

Donald P. Keck, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny his several federal and state law claims against Defendants. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Keck v. Virginia, No. 3:10-cv-00555-REP-MHL, 2011 WL 4573473 (E.D.Va. Sept. 30, 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 127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keck-v-virginia-ca4-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack