Lancaster v. Casey

Fourth Circuit

Lancaster v. Casey

174 F. App'x 158

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 31, 2006·No. No. 06-6077·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Milton E. Lancaster appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lancaster v. Casey, No. 5:05-ct-00586-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 4, 2005). 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:

Milton E. Lancaster appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lancaster v. Casey, No. 5:05-ct-00586-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 4, 2005). 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

Lancaster v. Casey, 174 F. App'x 158 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

174 F. App'x 158 (Lancaster v. Casey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related