Kelly ex rel. Coggins v. University Health Systems

Fourth Circuit

Kelly ex rel. Coggins v. University Health Systems

455 F. App'x 297

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 22, 2011

DocketNo. 11-1774

StatusPublished

This text of 455 F. App'x 297 (Kelly ex rel. Coggins v. University Health Systems) 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

Kelly ex rel. Coggins v. University Health Systems, 455 F. App'x 297 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Karen Kelly, on behalf of Joanne Cog-gins, appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for leave to amend and for appointment of counsel, which were filed in her underlying Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kelly v. Univ. Health Sys., No. 7:11-cv-00024-FL (E.D.N.C. June 21, 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Karen Kelly, on behalf of Joanne Cog-gins, appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for leave to amend and for appointment of counsel, which were filed in her underlying Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Kelly v. Univ. Health Sys., No. 7:11-cv-00024-FL (E.D.N.C. June 21, 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)

455 F. App'x 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelly-ex-rel-coggins-v-university-health-systems-ca4-2011.