Krug v. Loranth

599 F. App'x 512
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 27, 2015
DocketNo. 14-7619
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 599 F. App'x 512 (Krug v. Loranth) 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
Krug v. Loranth, 599 F. App'x 512 (4th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gregory C. Krug appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Krug v. Loranth, No. 1:13-cv-01409-DCN, 2014 WL 4955365 (D.S.C. Sept. 29, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 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

Related

BENGE v. RANDOLPH COUNTY
M.D. North Carolina, 2020
Harvey v. Russell
W.D. Virginia, 2020

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
599 F. App'x 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krug-v-loranth-ca4-2015.