Kindley v. Hicks

Fourth Circuit

Kindley v. Hicks

45 F. App'x 294

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 10, 2002·No. No. 02-6732·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jessie Benjamin Kindley, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Kindley’s motions for discovery and production of docu[295] ments and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Kindley v. Hicks, No. CA-01-768-2 (E.D.Va. Apr. 30, 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.

Jessie Benjamin Kindley, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Kindley’s motions for discovery and production of docu[295] ments and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Kindley v. Hicks, No. CA-01-768-2 (E.D.Va. Apr. 30, 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.

Kindley v. Hicks, 45 F. App'x 294 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

45 F. App'x 294 (Kindley v. Hicks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related