Lagana v. Tessema

Fourth Circuit

Lagana v. Tessema

454 F. App'x 226

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 18, 2011

DocketNo. 11-7168

StatusPublished

This text of 454 F. App'x 226 (Lagana v. Tessema) 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

Lagana v. Tessema, 454 F. App'x 226 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Lagaña appeals the district court’s order granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Lagana’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lagana v. Tessema, No. 8:10-cv-03493-PJM, 2011 WL 3608204 (D.Md. Aug. 15, 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:

Joseph Lagaña appeals the district court’s order granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Lagana’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lagana v. Tessema, No. 8:10-cv-03493-PJM, 2011 WL 3608204 (D.Md. Aug. 15, 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)

454 F. App'x 226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagana-v-tessema-ca4-2011.