King v. Kessler

Fourth Circuit

King v. Kessler

599 F. App'x 513

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 27, 2015·No. No. 14-7736·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ricardo Antione King appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2012) for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See King v. Kessler, No. 3:13-cv-00675-JAG (E.D.Va. Oct. 23, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before [514] this 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Ricardo Antione King appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2012) for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See King v. Kessler, No. 3:13-cv-00675-JAG (E.D.Va. Oct. 23, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before [514] this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

King v. Kessler, 599 F. App'x 513 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

599 F. App'x 513 (King v. Kessler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related